BEHAVIOUR OF BRICK AGGREGATES IN

BEHAVIOUR OF BRICK AGGREGATESIN

BASE AND SUBBASE COURSES

A Thesisby

M. Zakaria

Submitted to the Department of C~vil Engineering,Bsngladesh University of Engine~ring and Technology,Daccain partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree

ofMASTER OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

i

IIII

i

,

i"

September, 19112

1111111111111111111111111111111111#54722#

II.III

J• ..eJ

BEHAVIOUR OF BRICK AGGREGATESIN

BASE AND SUBBASE COURSES

A Thesisby

M. Zak aria

Approved as to style and content by

~(A.F.M. Abdur Rauf )Associate Professor,Dept. of Civil Engineering,BUET, Dacca.

Chairman

~~~(Dr. J.R'.i:houdhlJi'YjProfessor and Head,Dept. of Civii Engineering,BUET, Dacca.

Member'

Member

\

Mr. A.R. Chowdhury MemberChief Engineer,Roads and Highways Department,Bangladesh.

~( Dr. A.M. Hoque 1Associate Professor,Dept. of Civil Engineering,BUET,Dacca. '

"

,),

September, 1982.'"( :

'j",1

5YNOP 515

In Bangladesn roads are usually constructed offlexible pavement in which base and subbase courses servees key elements in distributing the superimposed loads tothe subgrade soil without overstressing. Because of tnedearth of stone aggregates in Bangladesh brick aggregatesara commonly used in base and subbase coursas. 5incemostresearchas on pavament design and analysis have'been carriedout in western countries with stone aggregates, they cannot be applied eli. rect.ly to condit;ions where brick aggregatasare used. In this thesis work attempt is made to investi-gate and recommend the suitable brick aggregates for baseand subbase constructions.

The search for appropriate materials gives gas burntpicked jhama bricks as most suitable type of bricks forbase and subbase construction. The wearability and absorp-tion of these bricks are minimum. The CBR valu'e obteinedwith gas burnt brick eggregates-sand-soil mixtures is ashigh as ninety seven percent; which is much above thatrequired for base courses of high type pavements.

The wsll graded aggregates and sand-soil mixtureswhen compscted give maximum CBR vslues. An optimum amountof fines to be used in the mixtures was obtained at whichmaximum CBR value is attained. The CBR value with brickaggregate-sand-soil mixture is seen to be more susceptibleto compaction than tha typical stone aggragates-sand-soilmixturas. for tha construction 0 f bssa and subbase coursesin flexible pavements, crushed gas burnt picksd jhama brickaggregate-sand-soil mixtures are suggested.

~-'''''', '

ACKNOWLEDGEM ENT

(All Praises to Allah 50bhano-Ta-ale)

The author wishes to express his sincerest indebtnese

and profound gratitude to Mr, A,f ,1'1, Abdur Rauf, Associate

Professor of the Department of Civil Engineering, Bangladesh

University of Engineering and Technology, Dacca, Without the

affectionate guidance and untiring encouragement provided by

him as the Chairman of the Research Committee this work

could never heve materialised,

,j

,;/

The author expresses his heartfelt gratitude to

Dr, J,R, Choudhury, Professor end Head of Civil Engineerlng,

for his constant encouragement and sympathetic co-operation,

The author also exprasses his regards to Dr,50hrabuddin

Ahmad Professor (and former Head), 'Department of Civil

Engineering, Mr, 5yed Noor-Ud-Deen Ahmed, Dr, A,M, Hoque,

Associate Professors of Department of Civil Engineering for

their velueeble advice and encouragement during the research

work.

The author gratafully remembers the as.sistances

rendered by his friends, colleagu es, all Laboratory staff,

for their co-operation and help in completing this work,

finally the author exprasses his thanks .to Mr,M,A,Malek

and Mr, Md, 5hahiduddin for their help in typing the script s

and for helping -in tha preparation of sketches,

I

CONTEIH5

SYNOPSIS

A:cnJOWLEDGEMEN T

LIIST Of TABLESIL'IST Of fIGURES

ABBREVIATIONS

CHAPTER ~ INTRODUCTION

1.1 General1.2 Role of Base and Subbase in Pavement

5tructu re1.3 factors Influencing tha Base and Subbase

Characteristics

1.3.1 Density and Stability

1.3.2 Effect of crushed particles

1.3.3 Effect of plasticity

1.3.4 Effect of skip grading

1.3.5 Effect of soundness

1.4 The Problem

1.5 Objectives of the Research

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2 1 General

2.2 Laboratory Studies

2.3 Field Studies2.4 Method of Eva'Iuation of Base and

Subbase courses

2.5 Practices and Recommendations for Baseand Subbase Coursas

Page

i

ii

vii>l

xii

1

1

2

5

6

7

7

8

9

10

10

12

12

12

15

18

23

-r-

, ,

2.5.1 Practices in U.S.A. and AASHTORecommendations

2.5.2 California Division of HighwaysRecommendations

Page

25

262.5.3 U.K. Practices and Transport and

Road Research Laboratory, U.K.Recommendations 28

,2.5.4 Practices and Recommendations by'

Bangladesh Road Research Laboretory 31

CHAPTER 3 MATERIALS 33

3.1 General 33

3.2 Materials Used for the Research 34

3.2.1 Coarse Aggregate for the Study 35

3.2.2 Fine Aggregate for the Study 36

3.2.3 Fines Used for the Study 36I

3.3 Test Procedures for Determining PhysicalProperties of Aggregates 37

CHAPTER 4 LABORATORr INVESTIGATIONS

4.1 Density-Gradation Relationship

4.2 Effect of Gradation on C8R Value

4.3 Effect of Fines on CBR Values

4.4 CBR for Different Types of Aggregates

4.5 CBR at Different Compactive Efforts

4.6 Decrease in Volume After Compaction

4.7 Plasticity Characteristics

CHAPTER 5 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSIONS OF TEST RESULTS

S.l Appropriate Materials

42

42

43

5683

9999

101

102

102

.~.r-

..

. ,

5.2 Gradation

5.3 Combination of Aggregates to ProduceGradation Z

5,4 Moisture Content

5,5 Percent Fines

5,6 Compaction

5.7 CBR for Different Types of Aggregat~s

S.B Plasticity Characteristics

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusion

6,2 Recommendations

6.2,1 Recommendations for the Futur~Study

6.2.2 Recommendations for FieldConstruction.

REfERENCES

Appendix-A: Availability of the Materials

Appendix-B: Hand Crushing of Bricks and Stones

Appendix-C: Test Results and figures of EquipmenfsI

.,~~,.. \-r "-"i~i;;;~1

,,".

v

Page

103

104

105

107

lOB109

110

111

111

114

114

115

11~.

119

123

130.

LIST OF TABLES

Description

2.1 Grading Requirement for Soil-AggregateMaterials for Subbase and Base Construc-tions (From AASHTO) 27

2.2

2.4

2.5

2.6

3.2

4.1

Percentage Composition by Weight of AggregateBase (From CDH)

Grading Requirement for Granular Sub-baseMaterials (From Road Note No. 29)

Typical Limits of Particle Size Distributionsfor Mechanically Stable Natural Gravel forUse as Base Course (From Road Note No. 31)

Strength Limits of Stone and Brick for BaseCourpe (BRRL)

Grading Limits for all in Crushed AggregateBase Materials (From BRRL)

Properties of Bricks

Physical Properties of Cdarse Aggregates

Physical Properties of Fine Aggregates

Physical Properties of Fines

Aggregate Gradation Requirements of DifferentOrganisations and the Selected Gradation Z

Moisture-Density Gradation Data

CBR-Density_Gradation Relationship

CBR-Density-Percent Fines Relationship

26

29

31

32

32

35

36

39

40

43

51

62

62

Table No. Description

4.S CBR for Different. Types of Materials

4.6 CBR-Compactive Effort Relation

vii

83

99

4.7

S. 1

6.1

Results of Hydrometer Analysis of the Finesof the Mixture

Job Mix Formula for Gradation Z

Gradation Z

101

106

113

B-1 Comparison of Gradations for CrushedBoulders and Crushed Bricks (Picked Jhama) 12S

B-2 Typical Gradations for Di fferent MaximumSizes (Crushed Picked J ham a Bricks) 126

B-3 Typical Gradations of Crushed Bricks(til max. si ze) Brok en by Labou rs ofDi fferent Ages and Sex. (Picked Jhama Bricks) 127

C-l CBR Test Results for Gas Burnt Picked JhamaBrick; Gradation Xl 130

C-2 CBR Test Results For Gas Burnt Picked JhamaBrick; Gradation X2 131

IC-3 CBR Test R esu 1t for Gas Burnt Picked Jhama

B rick; Gradation. X3 132

C-4 CBR Test Resu1t for Gas Burnt Picked JhamaBrick; Gradation X4 133

C-S CBR Test Resu 1t for Gas Burnt Picked J ham 8Brick; Gradation Xs 134

viii

Table No. Description Page

C.•.6 CBR Test Results for GAS Burnt PickedJ ham a Brick; Gradation Z 135 ,

C-7 CBR fest H esu 1t for Crushed ::JtonB;Gradation Z 136

C-O CBR Test R esu 1t for Coal Burnt PickedJ ham a Brick; Gradation Z 137

C-9 CBR fest R esul t for '-irst Class Bricks;Gradation Z 13B

C-I0 CBR fest R esu 1t for T hi rd Class Bricks;Gradation Z 139

C-11 Liquid Limit Test R esu 1t 140

C-12 Hydrometer Analysis 141

fig, No,

1,1

1,2

1,3

4,1

4,2

4,3

4,4

4,5

4,6

4,7

LIST Of fiGURES

Description

Typical flexible pavement crass-sectionDistribution of wheel loads.through flexiblepavements to the subgrade

Effect a f plasticity an triaxial strength ofa gravel mixture. Max, aggregate sizes is1 inch

Aggregate grading chart for gradation Xl(BRRL)

Aggregate grading chart for gradation X2( AASHO)

Aggregate grading chart for gradation X3( AASHO)

Aggregate gradin g chart for gradation X4(Rr,.31, TRRL)

Aggregate grading chart for gradation XS( CDH)

Gradations sup erimposed

Aggregate grading chart for gradation Z(selected gradation)

1

3

9

44

4546

4748

49

504,8

4,9

4,10

4,11

4,12

4,13

4.14

4,15

4,16

Moisture-density relationship:(A) for gradation XJ.: (lJ) for gradation X2Moisture-density relationship:(A) for gradation X3, (B) for gradation X4Moisture-density relation~hip:(A) for gradation X5, (B) for gradation Z

CBR curves for different specimens of GBPJbricks; gradation Xl

CBR curves for different specimens of GBPJbricks; gradation X2CBR curves for different specimens of GRPjbricks; gradation X3CBR curves for different specimens of GBPjbricks; gradation X4CRR curves for diff.erent specimens of GBPjbricks; gradation X5CHR curves for different specimens of GBPjbricks; gradation Z

53

54

55

57-59

60-62

63-65

66-68

69-71

72-74

x

CAR, dry density and percent fines relation 81

Moisture content-density relationship forcrushed stone, coalburnt picked jhama, firstclass and third class bricks (gradation Z) 84

"'"--

Fig, No,

4,17

4,18

4,19

4,20

4,21

4,22

4,23

4,24

4,2S

4,26

4,27

4,28

4,29

B-1

B-2

C-l

C-2

C-3

Description

CER-density relation:(A) gradation Xl'(B) gradation X2CBR-density relation: (A) gradation X3,(B) gradation X4CBR-density relation: (A) gradation XS'(B) gradation Z

CBR for different per~ent fines

CBR .for different specimens of crushedstone (gradation Z)CBR for different specimens of coal burntpicked jhama brick (gradation Z)

CBR for different specimens of first classbricks (gradation Z)CBR for different speC1mens of third classbricks (gradation Z)CBR density relation: (A) crushed stone,(B) coal burnt picked jhpma bricks

CBR d.ensity relation: (A) first class bricks,(B) third class bricks

CBR at different compactive efforts

Grain size distribution of the componentaggregates of gradation Z,

Gradation band 0 f gradation 'Z' andgradation of the combined mixture

Equipment and materials for the compactionof CBR molds

The mixture is ready for compaction

The compacted mold is ready for submersionin water

75

76

77

78-80

85

88 -90

91-93

94-96

97

94

100

128

129

142

142

143

Fig,No.

C-4

C-5

C-6

Description

The CBR specim en is being tested ina mechanical loading press

The sample is being tested 1n a universaltesting mac hi n e

The specimens after being tested

xi

143

144

144

~),i",-

. ~.'*r:

AASHO

ABBREVIAT IONS

- American Association for State Highway Officials

AASHTO - American Association for State Highway andTransportation Officials

ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials

ANSI - American National Standard Institute

ACV - Aggregate Crushing Value

BRRL - Bangladesh Road Research Laboratory

PCF - Pounds Per Cubic Feet

CBR

CDH

GBPJ

LAA .

PI

- California Bearing Ratio

- California Division of Highways

- Gas Burnt Picked Jhama

- Loss Angeles Abrasion

- Plasticity Index,

PSI - Pounds Per Square Inch

Pen. - Penetration

RN - Road Note

SW - Sand Well Graded

SP. Gr. - Specific Gravity

Spn.

TRRL

USA

U.KWT.ZAV

- Sp ecim en

- Transport and Road Research Laboratory

- United States of America

- United Kingdom

- Weight

- Zero Air Void

.r--.

-,

CHAPTER-lINTRODUCTION

1.1 General

In Bangladesh construction of flexible road pavements.

is being preferred because of their low initial cost and

adaptibility for staga constructiop. Flexiblapavament may

be dafinedas a structure that maintains intimate contact

with and distributas loads to the subgrade and depends on

aggregate interlock. particle friction and cohesion for

stabili.ty. Classical flexible pavements include primarily~;C:-...

those pavements that are composed ofa eeries of granular

layers topped by a relatively thin high quality bituminous

wearing surface. Fig. 1.1 shows a typical flexible pavement

IIIWDIII~ltlIII

Subgrade

-Surface or wearing course

Shoulder treatment

~Road bedNatural soil orcom paeled fillmaterial

Base

SubbaseIII III

Subgrade

Intermediatecourse

Surface course&

-"a::;~£"'Illc-",-uC.-'":5€E~,£

Fig, 1,1 Typical flsxible pavement crass-section(l),

2

cross-section. The principal elemen"ts of the infrastructure

here are shown to be the pavemen"t that is composed of a

'wearing surface'; 'base'; subbase and 'subgrade'.

The wearing surface and the base often comprise two

or more layers that are somewhat diffarent in composition

operations. On heavy duty flexible'pavements a subbase o.f

select materiel is generally placed between the base and

subgrade. Sometimes the material under a rigid pavement

is called a subbase.

1.2 Role of Base end Subbase in Pavement Structure

The function of the base course varies according to

the type of the pavement. Base courses are used under rigid

pavements for (1) prevention of pumping, (2) protection

ageinst frost action. (3) drainage. (4) prevention of volume

change of the subgrade. (5) increased structural capacity,

and (c) expedition of construction.

The top lsyer of a flexible pavement is constructed

by a relatively thin high quality bituminous wearing surface.

The main thiCKness is built by the base and subbase courses.

let W be the the load on the surface of the pavement having

a total thickness of 'd' incnes (fig. 1.2a). Based upon

approximations of stress distribution concepts in homogeneous.

one layer (Boussinesq) system, the load is essumed to be

distributed through the pavement to the subgrade in the form

3

of a cone. The surface of ~he cone is at an angle B with

the vertical axis of the cone (the axis being assumed to

be at rignt angles to the surface of the pavement), and

the unit pressure of 'q' pounds per square inch on the

subgrade is assumed to be uniform. The radiuj of the base

of the cone at the subgrade is d t.an B. and tne relation

of the thickness of tne pavement to the load and the unit

w

[ aJ

Bottom or.. pavement

-----

[ b J

fig. 1.2 Distribution of wheel loads througn flexiblepavements to the subgrade.

subgrade pressure is

q = VI2tan B

1.1

Equation 1.1 assumes tnat a wheel load is concentreted

at a point, whereas it is actually distributed over an area

of contact between the tire and the pavement as snown in

fig. 1.2(b). If this area of contact is circular in snape

2 2VI = qn(d+a) tan Band hence the unit subgrade

4

2 2pressure is q = W/u(d+a) tan 8; since a is small in

comparison to d. from the above equations it is seen that

the subgrade stress dua to imposed load i. inversely propor-

tional to the square of the depth of the base and subbase

course (assuming that the thickness of wearing course is

small in comparison of the combined" base and subbass courses),

Analyzing the pavement section as a multilayered

elastic system Peattie(2) found the verticai stress solutions

and presented in graphical forms, The stresses at points

vertically below the road surface ere dependent on factors

influenced by both the thicknesses and the elasticities

of the upper layers.

N"l (3)" 1 d h "f f h " hei son il ustrate t e in luence 0 c anging t e

pavement layer thicknesses upon the vertical compressive

stress factor for a three-layered pavement system, He showed

thet for a given load, the subgrade stress is greatly dec-

reased by an increase of the base course thiCKness,

Hence the principal purpose of base course in e

flexible pevement is to distribute or 'epread' the stresses

created by wheel loads acting on the wearing surface so that

the stresses transmitted to the Bub grade will not be suffi-

ciently great to result in excessive deformation or diaplace-

ment of that foundation layer, The base course also may

provide drainage (if so designed) and give added protection

against frost action when necessary,

5

1.3 Factors Influencing tha Base and Subbase Characteristics

Modern pavement design procedures are based on multi-

Isyered elastic theory concept. In sll rational pavement

design procedures, it is emphasized that the stress at any

point below the pavament due to a load or loads.on tha

surface is a function of many factors of which the quality

.of the material is the constant infiuencing factor. The

strains and stresses are functions of Poison's ratio and

modulus of elasticity which depend on the material type and

quality. The quality reflects the properties like strength,

toughness, soundness, durability. Other important factors

which influence the basa and subbase courses are the parti-

cle size distribution, particle shape, relative density,

internal friction, cohesion, typa of binder, void ratio,

and porosity. The above factors influence the following

general characteristics of the mixture used in base and

subbase construction:

1) Density and stability,

2) Effect of cru shed particles,

3) Effect of plasticity,

4 ) Effect of skip grading,

5) Soundness, and

6) Permeability.

.•..

fIf

6

1.3.1 Density and stability

The stability of any layer is its most important

requirement for design. Stability of an aggregate-soil

mixture depends upon particle-size distribution, particle

shape, relative density, internal friction and ~ohesion •.

A granular material designed for maximum stability should

posses high internal friction to resist deformation under

load. Internal friction and subsequent shearing resistance

depend to e lerge extent upon density, particle shape, and

grain size distribution. Of these factors, the size distri-

bution of the aggregatss, particularly the proportion of

fine to the coarse fraction, is considered to be the most

important. for maximum stability the mixture should have

fines just sufficient to fill all the voids between aggre-

gates to float in the soil. The density will decrease ana

the mixture is practically impervious and frost susceptible.

Thus the stability of an aggregate soil mixture is dependent

upon the grain size distribution of the particles.

The grain size distribution of a material can bed ~represented by the equation p = 100 (0-) where d repre-

sents the sieve in question, p is the percent by weight

finer than the sieve, and D is the maximum size of the

aggregate. Maximum density genera~ly occurs where the expo-

nsnt n equals to 0.5. This yields 6.2 percent passing No.200

« Equation 11.1 given in 'Principles of pavement design'by Yoder and ~itczak.

-".~--------

7

mesh sieve for e material which has a maximum grain size

of t inch. Comparing density and strength in terms of CBR

it is seen that maximum CBR resulted when ~he qu~ntity of

fines was somewnat less than that indicated for maximum

density. Dsnsity ~s well as sta~ility incraases as the

size of the aggregata increases.

1,3.2 Effect of crushed particles

For identical grain size distribution, the California

Bearing Ratios of mixtures made up of angular particles are

usually somewhat graater than those containing mostly rounded

particles. The crushed particles have, in general, more

stability than round grained materials, due primarily to

added grain interlock, In addition, for a particular grad a-

tion the crushed mat.arials alsO possess high co-efficients

of permsability and, hence ere more easily drained, Crushed

materials show excellent perfor~ance in most instances and

ars normally preferred.

1,3,3 Effect of plasticity

The physical properties o.f the binder soil hsve a

great effect on stability, especially when grain to grain

contact is destroyad, Fig, 1,3 shows the effe~t of plasticity

of the binder on the triaxial strength of a gravel with

varying amounts of material passing No, 30 mesh sieve,

!IIIt!

B

I. is seen that when tne percen. passing No. 30 mesh

sieve is low, plasticity has vary li.tle effect on the

strength, and tha. as the amount of material passing No.30

sieve is increased plasticity has an increasing effect.

1.3.4 Effect of skip grading

It must be recognized that if the material is not

'well graded' the plasticity requiremen.s, as weJ.l as the

require~ents relating to the amount of fine material, do

not necessarily appJ.y as they do for well graded ma.erials.

The net effect of having a skip-graded material is .hat

there is a deficiency in intermediate size and, as a result,

the void space is increased.

The effect of skip grading on the triaxial strength

of a mixture has a complex reJ.ationship and depends upon

the amount of material passing No. 200 sieve, as well as

on the dust ratio. The dust ratio is the ratio of the

portion passing No. 30 mesh sieve to the portion passing

a No. 200 mesh sieve. For low amoun.s of material passing

No. 200 sieve the dust ratio has li.tle effect and it can

be concluded that skip grading would have no harm upon the

mix. On the other hand, for higher amounts of material

passing No. 200 sieve, an increase in the dus. ratio causes

a decrease in the strength upon a certain limit of dust

ratio and then the strength increases beyond this limit.

.-..<

9

305 10 15 20 25Percent passing a No. 30 sieve

o

80 -

60

••• Ill 40•••••• .-< :Jx"'10"'

• .-< III

t~20

120

• .-<"'0.

••••••••III•••..";100

Fig. 1.3 Effect of plasticity on triaxial strength of agravel. Maximum aggregate size is 1 inch.¥

Furthermore plasticity becomes less important when skip

grading is used.

1.3.5 Effect of soundness

Soundness as regards base and subbase materials, ie

defined as the ability of the aggregate to withetand abra-

sion and/or crushing. This is important from the standpoint

of generation of fines under the action of rollers and

traffic. Durability ot the course depends mainly on the

soundness of the aggregates. Unsound aggregates disinteg-

rate badly under the action of weather.¥ Fig. 11.5 given in 'Principles of .pavement design'

by Yoder and Witczak.

10

1.4 The Problem

In conventiona~ road pavements the aggregates used

for surface, base and subbase courses consist of crushed

stone, gravel and crusned slag, These dense, low absorptive

natural aggregates having high crushing strength are not

available in Bangladesh except in sma~~ quantities in

Northern 5y~het and Dinajpur areas. It is extremely expen-

sive to carry the stone aggregates from their sources to

the job site if the haulage length is too high. Again with

the increased and continued consumption those naturally

occuring aggregate sources are being depleted. On the other

hand bricks are available readily or can be manufactured

in kilns near the job sites. Crushed brick aggregates are

being used and are in use for a long time in the construc-

tion of base end subbase courses of pavements. But no

research has yet been carried out to investigate their

suitability and no report is available about the perfor-

mences of brick aggregates in such constructions. Therefore

searCh has to be intensified to investigate the suitability

of brick aggregate~ in the base and subbase courses.

1.5 Objectives of the Research

The strength and behaviour of aggregates depend upon

a number of variables, SUCh as gradation, porosity, absorp-

tion,wearability etc. Review of literatures shows a

. "- "'~.~.'-','II

11

deficiency of knowledge in regard to'the properties of

brick aggregates and aggregate sand mixtures. The objec-

tives of the research therefore are as follows:

(i) to determine the physical properties of brick

aggregates to be used i~ base and subbase

construction and to compare these properties

with stone aggregates;

(ii) to find the effect of gradation, moisture

content, perc ant fines on CSR values for

crushed brick-sand-soil mixtures;

(iii) to find the effect of compactive efforts

applied during compaction on the CBR values of

different aggregate sand-soil mixtures.

. .. _0-j

-'''-~'.

CHAPTER-2LITERATURE REV1EW

2.1 General

Literatures are not available directly on the use of

brick eggregetes in base and subbase construction, Stone

aggregates and .stone-sand or stone~soil mixtures have been

used for the construction of base, subbase courses for high

type pavements and top courses for low type pavements.

Leteratures, specifications, recommendations are available

regarding the characteristics of natura~ aggregates and

soil-aggregate mixtures in base and subbase courses. Soma-

times the aggregates are stabilized by some admixturas to

hava a firm basa or subbase to provide the support for a

relatively thin waaring surfaca. Literatures are also avail-

able for such type of construction, The present research

work has been takan to determine the cnaracteristics of

untreated brick aggregata-soil ~ixture in base and subbsse

constructions, Limited litarature available for unstabilized

stone aggregate and/or gravel - soil mixtures are discuased

in the following articles.

2.2 Laboratory Studies

Load supporting capacity indicated by the stability

and density of tha aggregata soil mixtura is the principal

requirement of a base or subbase coursa. Different organiaa-•tions carried investigations to find a suitable gradation

13

to have dense and stable mixtures. These worK in the form

of recommandations are discussed in Article 2.5.

The proportion of the fines (materia~ passing No.200

sieve) to coarse fraction is also an import an) factor to

have a dense and stable mixture. Deklotz1s(4J works discussed

by Yoder (1975) on "Effect of varying the quantity of fines

of highway aggregac~s on their scability" reveals that

there is an optimum amount of fines for e particular aggre- ~':

gate-soil mixture at which the mixture will have its maximum

density and stability for a particu~ar compactive effort.

According to Mr. Yoder results of leboratozy studies on a

well graded stone aggregate snow that the maximum denaity

occurs when the mixes contain about B to 10 perc ant fines

passing a No.200 sieve. In contract, the maximum stability

as measured by the CBR test rasulted when about 6 to B

percent of the msterial passed a No. 200 mesh sieve.

Yoder( 5)(1975) also has slolownthe affect of compactive

effort on density and stability of a stone aggregate mixture

for a particular gradation. He concluded that the more the

compactive effort, the more will be the density and stability.

But the response for the increase is more pronounced in the

case of stability rather than density.

Laboratory studies also were carried on to compare

the density and stebility valuee between round shaped

naturally occuring graval mixtures and crushed stone mixtures.

9( ),

14

These tests and field experiences have shown that crushed

particles have in general, more stability than round-

grained material due primarily to added grain interlock.

Tests to find the effect of the physical properties

of binder soil on

by Makdisi-Ilyas.

the stability

F. (6)al.Z . They

of the mixture were dona

fou'nd that the effect 0 f

. -<-------

plasticity is detrimental to the strength with higher amount

of material passing No. 200 mest) sieve. This happens due

to the reason that plasticity is dependent upon the amount

of material passing No. 30 sieve is increased. The required

amount of material p,as1sing No. 30 sieve for maximum density

is 15.30 percent and when the binder content exceeds this

value, the plasticity becomes important.

Faiz, A( 7) worked with the skip graded mixtures. It

must be recognized that if the material is not 'well graded'

the plasticity requirements as well as requirements relating

to the amount of the fine material, do not necessarily apply

as they do for well graded materials. The net effect of

having a skip graded material is that there is a deficiency

in intermediate sizes and, as a result the void space is

increased. Hesults from laboratory studies show that skip

grading gives a complex relationship with triaxial strength.

which depends on both dust ratio and percent material passing

No. 200 Sl.eve. It is also seen that for high values of dust

r(, I' '

I

15

ratio and plasticity, the skip grading becomes baneficial

to some extent,

Mainfort and Lawton (1952)(6) carried investigations

on the laboratory compaction tests of coarse graded paving

materials. They reported tha result of a laboratory study

for the applicability of the Proctor type of compaction of

coarse graded materials. The tests indicated ths t the

standard Proctor method using a standard 4 inch mold is/ .

suitabla for determining the maximum density and optimum

moisture contant of coarse materials and mixtures. from

their fiald observations it was found that the densities

obtained in the laboratory by the Proctor type of compac-

tion test appear to agree with densities obtainable with

either vibratory or roller types of field equipment,

2,3 field Studies.

Since the end of the second world war there has been

a vast increase in highway traffic and many test roads were

constructed to observe the performances of the roads and

to develop design methods. In 1949 e research project was

set up by Highw~y Re~earch Board in Maryland, USA, to

determine tha relative effects of various axle loads and

configurations on distress of pavements, This test was,

intended for observation of the behaviour of concrets

pavement constructed on a imporved granular subbase material

and no findings regarding base course was obtained,

.~. .j-.

16

The WASHO road test was done prior to AASHTO road

test neer Malad, Idaho, USA, For flexible pavement the

test recommends a total thickness of pavement and basa for

different axle loads,

The most intensive and extensive researc~ on road

was a co-operative project sponsored by AASHO at Ottowa,

Illinois, USA, In the principal flexible pavement test

sections the base course was constructed by a well-graded

crushed lime stone and the subbase by a uniformly graded

sand-gravel mixture, Other test sections were constructed

with bases by a well graded uncrushed gravel, a bituminous

plant mixture, and a cement treated aggregate, On the basis

of the performance records of the various test sections a

new concept to evaluate the pavement infrastructure was

introduced which is PSI - Pavement Service-ability Index,

The important conclusion made by them about bases is -

"the performance of the treated- gravel base is definitely

superior to that of the untreeted cru shed stone base",

The first of 'the British full scale field experimsnt

began in 1949 on a section of the Al trunk roed in Yorkshire

U,K. They used three types of base meterial - tar macadam

baee; dry bound stone base; hand pitched base, From obser-

vations over a period of ten yeers they found He t the

open textured tar macadam bases performed much better than

either the dry bound stone bases or the hand pitched basas.,

r'--,.. :..

"

17

In addition the hand-pitched base showed increased surfaca

deformation and founq worse than dry bound stone base and

is no longer recommended.

A further experiment, also on the Al road at Alconbary

Hill in Huntingdonshire, U.K was initiated in 1957 to

compare tha performances of five different base materials

laid to various thicknesses. The base materials were cement.'''!,.

stabilized sand, wet mix slag, lean concrete, tar macadam, ;r:'

and hot rolled asphalt. Experimantal sections, each 2000 ft

long, wera constructed on a sand subbase of varying thick-

nesses. Results after six years show that the sections with

rolled asphalt bases have performed the best whilst those

with sand-cement base are clearly the worst. All these

field tests for base courses were comparative studies

between different types of beses, treated or untreated but

no test was done with one specific base by varying its

components, materials etc.

Field experiments were done by Mr. Drake(9) of

Kentucky Department of Highways on the performances of

flexible baee courses designed pri'rrl-a,:tilyto improve the"

riding qualities of' high type bituminouS,~pavements. Four'-. '-'-inch dense graded lims stone base was constructed ~ith 1

inch downgraded; 5 to 15 percent passing No. 200 sieve,

well greded material over a 4 inch of waterbound macadam

subbaae course. Observetions and measurements showed that

>, ~\., '

. I

16

the combination of the two courses could be built satie-

factorily, the dense graded aggregate produced a high base

deneity and the possibilities for finishing to uniform

section were much better with the dense graded aggregate

than with the macadam.(10) •Cadergren ,made field CBR tests on granular

subbase end bases. He criticised the general idea that the

CBR values on large macadam type construction will be higher

then with emeller aggregates. In testing coarse grained

materiels he found elmost invariably that CBR values are

not too high but too 10W.J ..

2.4 Method of Evaluation of Base end Subbase Courses

The base and subbase courses are evaluated in the

field end/or in the laboratory by the following methode.

(i) Plete Beering Test - f«(ii) Triaxial Compression Test - L««

(iii) Stabilometer Test - L

(iv) California Bearing Ratio Test (f and L)

(i) Plate Baaring Test

The Plate Bearing test d~veloped by Mr. N.W. McLeod

of Canada Transportation Department expanded the results

« f indicatee field test •• « L indicatee laboratory test.

19

of his exteneive field study relating to it to pavement

design methods based on the theory of elasticity. The test

can be usad to measure the strength at any elevation in an

asphalt pavement structure: surface of the subg.rades. top

of subbase, top of the base course, or surfece o.f the

finished pevement.

Deflection of circular rigid plates are measured by

deflection dials under vertical loads applied at some

standard rate. The modulus of the layer on which the plates

are placed is calculated by means of the following equations,

PD.

where P is the unit load on the plate (psi) and 6 ie the

deflection of the plate (inches). Tests are generally made

directly on the unconfined base course and the field value

is adjusted to the most unfavourable base condition that

can be expected. This can be accomplished by the additional

data obtained by loading the samples in confined conditions,

(ii) Triaxial Compression Test

The triexial comprassion test was developed to deter-

mine the shear stress of a soil sample under lateral pressure,

The test is suitable for only fine grained soil or sand

where specimens are loaded vertically under constant lateral

pressure to have a shear failure. The stability of the soil

is determined by the equation,

S = C + 6" tan iil

where S = shearing res'istanc8 developed

C = cohesion

6 = vertical stress applied

iil = angle of internal friction.

./

20

values of cohesion and internal friction can be determined

from the plots of the test results.

Based on the principles of triaxial test, McDowel

developed Texas triaxial cell to evaluate base course

materials. The apparatus is suitable for performing a large

number of tests economically. Shear stress is measured at

different normal stresses and the results are plotted to

classify different types of materials.

(iii) Stabilometer Test

California Division of Highways developed a semitheo-

ritical method of flexible pavement design based on two

properties of materials cohesion and friction. These proper-

ties of treated or untreated base, subbase or subgrede

materials are determined by tests in the Hveem stabilometer

developed by F.N Hveem and R.M. Coumany of California

Division of Hignways (CDH) which measuree the horizontal

pressure developed in a short cylindrical sample loaded

21

vertically on its ends. This device was concieved to

measure the stability of both field and laboratory samples

of bituminous pavement and treat~d base courses. Loads are

applied vertically; the resulting horizontally devaloped

stresse.s are measured, and the vertical and horizo nta.Lly

developed stresses are measured. T~e vertical and horizon-

tal pressures are utilized in the following equation for

calculating stabilometer resistance values.

R = 100 - lOU(2.5/D2)(Pv/Ph- 1) + 1

where R c resistance vaiueP = applied vertica.L pressure (160 psi)v

Ph= transmitted horizontal pressura at Pv = 160 psi

D2= displacement of stabilometer fluid necessary to

increase horizontal pressure from 5 to 100 psi,

measured in revolutions of a calibrated pump

handle.

Cohesion is measurad by meane of the cohesiometer,

an apparatus capable of breaking small beams of base courseI

materials. The base course materials are then ranked on the

basis of stabilometer resistance values and cohesometer values.

(iv) california Bearing Ratio Test

The California Bearing Ratio test abbreviated as CBR

is the most widely used method of eva.Luation of subgrade,

22

subbase and base course materials. The method was first

developed by California Division of Highways and then

adopted and modified by U.S Corps of Engineers, in 1961.

The American Associetion of State Highway.Officials, AASHO

acceptad this test in 1963 with Designation T 193-63 fordetermining the bearing values of s~bgrade soils and some

sub-base and base course materials containing only a small

amount of material retained on the in sieve.

CBR test is a penetration test wherein, a standardized

piston, having an end area of 3 sq. in. is caused to pene-

trate the sample at a standard rate of 0.05 inch per minute.

The unit load required to penetrate the sample at 0.1 .inch

penetration is then compared with a value of 1000 Ib per eq.

inch required to effect the same penetration in standard

crushed rock. The test is to be carried on sample of subbase

or base material compacted to the moisture and density

condition which site investigat~on and considerations of

the construction methods and plant to be used, indicate to

be appropriate. For design purpose the CBR value of the

base or subbase course at worst condition is required which

can be obtained by testing the sample, after being saturated.

Due to swelling of the specimen, the top surface may be

loose to some extent. Therefore the stress-strain curve

(Fig. 4,11 obtained from the penetration test some times

will be concave upward which requires correction by moving

23

it to the right. By CBR value it means corrected value

when this correction has been applied to the curve.

Laboratory CBR values obtained on samples compacted

in confining steel molds are obviously to be checked in

the field after construction. This can be done by comparing

the densities in the laboratory and in the field or directly

penetrating the course in the field. Field CBR test is

basically the same as the laboratory test bu~ a correlation

is to be established to correct the field values for satu-

ration, The laboratory CBR values are expected to be slightly

higher than those obtained in the field becwse of the

confining action of the mold in the leboratory. Precautione

must be taken during field tests to ensure intimate contact

of the piston with an undisturbed surface of the material

tested.

2.5 Practices and Recommendationa for Base and Subbase Courses

For a high type pavement generally both base, between

surface course" and subbase, and subbase, between base and

subgrade are constructed. For low and intermediate type of

pavement subbase course may be omitted. In some cases the

base for a low type pavement can be used as subbase for a

high type pavement. Whether it is base or subbase the

objective of the present research is about the behaviour

of the materials used in such construction. Mainly thers

~'I,

24

are 3 types of constructions for base and subbase courses

on the basis of materia.ls used. These are:

1. Soil-aggregata and grave.l bases

2. Macadam bases

3. Treated ba ses.

In some types of macadam bases and in treated bases a

binder material is used to create bond between grains. This

treatment is uaua~ly costly and suggasted for high type

pavements and where other type of construction is not

economical. Soil-aggregate and gravel bases often termed

a~ untreated bases are constructed without admixture. The

stability, and density are developad in the course byusing proper gradation, appropriate amount of fina material -

silt and c~ay, moisture content and of coursa by proper

compaction. When aggregates ere available near road side,

soil from the road bed can be mix~d with them and compacted.

In most cases, this type of construction is economical.

The research work has been concerned with the evaluation

of this type of mixtures. Almost in a~l developing countries

and a~so in some developed countries this type of construc7

tion is in use for rural roads. In the following articles

the recommendations and practices regarding this untreated

base course constructions are briefly discussed.

...(.;..7'.~__ .,,=.,.-,;

• ~:":"Jt'l

25

2.5.1 Pra8ti8es in USA and AASHTO Recommendations

In some states of USA low type roads are constructed

with soil aggregate mixtures as the surface course. In

intermediate type of roads and in some high type rural

roads untreated soil aggregate mixtures are used for bese

and subbase constructions. The Amer1can Association of

State Highway and fransportation Officials has first come

to specify meterials for this type of constructions. The

materials for aggregate and soil aggregate subbase, base

and surface courses are epecified by AASHTO(ll) under

designation M 147-57(67) (71). AASHTO specified 'Materiale

for Aggregate and Soil-Aggregate subbasa, base, and surface

courses'. The requiremente are as follows:

General Reguirement

(a) Coarse aggregate retained on NO,lO sieve shall

consist of hard, durable particl~s or fregments of stone,

gravel or slag.

(b) Coarse eggregate shall have a percentege of wear

by Los Angeles test, of not.more then 50,

(c) Fine aggregate passing NO,lO sieve shall consist

of natural or crushed sand, and fine mineral particlas

passing NO,200 sieve,

(d) The fraction passing No. 200 sieve shall not be

greater than two thirds of the fraction passing No. 40 sieve,

.'. ;'~r

26

The fraction passing No. 40 sieve sha~l have a liquid limit

not greater than 25 and a plasticity index not greater

than 6.

(e) All material shall be free from vegetable matter

and lumps or balls of clay.

Subbase Material

Materials for subbase shall conform to the general

requirements for gradings A,B,C,D,E or F (Table 2.1).

Base Course Material

Materials for base cours~ shall conform to the

general requirements for grading A,B,C,D,E or F.

The United states Agency for International Development(l2)

in the Guidelines for Highways and Bridges specified Grading

B (Table 2.1) for class-l aggregate base course. The require-

ments ere same as specified by AA5HTO M 147.

2.5.2 California Division of Highways Recommendations

Since its establishment the California Division of

Highways (CDH) has been making vital contribution to the

development of pavement technology. Engineers, researchers

of this division from time to time brought new techniques

for the construction of road pavements. In the 'standard

:,

;, .

1,' •... , I\ .'.f

. "'_. :tr

27

Table 2.1 Grading Requirement for Soil Aggregate Materialsfor Subbase and Base Constructions (from AASHTO)

Sievedesi g-nation

Percentage by wt. passing square mesh sieveGrading Grading Grading Grading Grading

ABC D EGrading,

f

2 inch

1 inch

t inch

No. 4

No. 10

No. 200

100

30-65

25-55

15-40

2-8

100

75-95

40-75

30-60

20-45

5-20

100

50-85

35-65

25-50

5-15

100

60-100

50-85

40-70

5-20

100

55-100

40-100

6-20

100

70-100

55-100

8-25

specification,(13) of this division, aggregate subbase and

base courses are specified under section 25 and 26 respectively.

CDH classified both subbase and base courses into three

classes viz c'!'ass-l,class-2 and class-3. Requirements for

class-l aggregata base are as fol~ows:

la) The aggregates shall consist of a crushed product

of stone or gravel. It sha'!'lbe free from vegetable matter

and other deleterious substances, ,and shaj,l be of such natura

that it can be compacted readily under watering and rolling

to form a firm. stable base.

(b) The amount of crushing shall be regulated SO that

at least 80 percent by weight of lt inch maximum size material

retained on the No. 4 sieve and 90 percent by weight of the

t inch maximum size material retained on No. 4 sieve.

2B

(c) The percentage composition by weight of aggr~gate

base shall conform to one of the grading given in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 Percentage Composition by Weight for AggregateBase (from CDH)

Sieve Percenta~e passingsize

It" maximum size t" maximum size

2" 100

It" 90-100 100

t" 50-B5 90-100

No. 4 30-45 35-55

No. 3D 10-25 10-30

No.200 2-9 2-9

(d) The aggregate base shall conform to tha following

requiremsnts:

Test sLoss in Wetshot Rattler

Loss in Loss-Angeles Rattler

Resistance (R-value)

Sand equivalent

Reguirem ent s

55% rna".

SO% rna".

BO min.

50 min.

2.5.3 U.K. Practice and Transport and Road ResearchLaboratory. U.K. Recommendations

The road subbase and base courses are constructed

conforming to the requirements given in Road Note No.29(14)

"

0".".""1.

29

of Transport and Road Research Laboratory, U.K and Ministry

fT t 'f' ,(15)o ranspor spec~ ~cat~on suggests a granular subbase

. = •.. ~ .

material to conform to the gradings specified in Table-2.3.

Type-l aggregates comprise crushed rock, crushed concrete.

crushed slag or well burnt nonplastic shale. These materials

will remain stable over a much wider ~ange of moisture

contents than type 2 aggregates whicn include well graded

natural sands, gravel:s. and rock or slag fines, and are

therefore to be preferred in Bangladesh, where site conditions

are likely to be wet during construction. The Road Note No.29

requires a minimum CBR of 30 'percent on aggregate subbase.

Table 2.3 Grading Requirements for Granular SubbaseMaterials (From Road Note No, 29)

B.S. Percent by wt. passingsievesize Type-l Aggregate Type-2 Aggregate

3 inch 100 100

1-2-inch 85-100 85-100

3/8 inch 25-85

3/16 inch 25-45 25-85

No. 25 8-22 8-45

No.200 0-2 0-10

For base course the minimum CBR requirement is 80

percent and suitable materials for base include crushad stone

or blast furnance slag, dry lean concrete, cement bound

granular material and bituminous bound materials •

30

The Transport and Road Research Laboratory, U.K prepared

Road Note No. 31(16) in 1962, edited third time in 1977 to

give e guide line for the structural design of bitumen-

surfaced roads in tropical end subtropical countries. The

techniques given in this report are suitable for and followed

by many deve~oping countries. They ~ecommended in the note

the two types of untreated base materiels sucn as

i) mechanica~ly-stable natural gravel or crushed

gravel and

ii) cru shed rock.

The requirements of these base courses are given as folloWB:

a) The natural gravel or crushed gravel must have a

grading that is mechanically stable and must contain suffi-

cient fines to provide a dense material. TabLe 2.4 gives

typicel grading limits of suitable mater~als.

b) The material passing 85 ~25 um sieve (No. 40 ASTM)

should be such that plasticity Inde.x is less than 6; liquid

limit is less than 25 and linear strinkage does not exceed

4.0 percent.

c) The gravel should be compected to a field density

equel to or greater than the maximum density acnieved in

the British Standard compaction test (lUO percent meximum

stendard AA5HD density) and for this density in the leboratory

the minimum CBR after four days immersion in water, should

be BD percent.

Il-

Ii,

31

Table 2.4 Typical Limits of Partic~e Size Distributionsfor Mechanica~ly Stable Natural Gravel forUse as Base Course (from Road Note No. 31)

Percentage passingB.S. sieve Nominal maximum sizesize

mm(ftin)37.5 mm(lt") 20 mm(1- in) 10 mm(tin) 5

37.5 mm(lt in) 100 - .20 mm(t in) 80-100 100

10 mm(t in) 55-80 80-100 100

5 mm(3/16 in) 40-60 50-75 80-100 100

2.36 mm(No.7) 30-50 35-60 5U-80 80-100

1.18 mm(No.14) 40-65 50-80

600 um(No.25) 15-30 15-35 30-60

300 u mm (No.52) 20-40 20-45

75 um (No. 200) 45-15 5-15 10-25 10-25

2.5.4 Practice and Recommendation by Bangladesh Road ResearchLaboratory

W.G. HoDGKIN50N(17) under assignment to the Ministry of

Overseas Development, U,K, prepared a guide in co-operation

with the Bangladesh Road Research Laboratory for the etruc-

tural design of bitum~n surfaced roads in Bangladesh. The

guide recommends the requirements of brick aggregates to be

used for base course construction. But no field test or

laboratory tests were made to eva~uate the construction with

crushed brick aggregates. The design charts call for the baae

32

to have B minimum CBH of 80 percent, Only gas burnt picked

picked jhama bricks with the following properties are

suggested to be used,

Table 2,5 Strength Limits of Stone and BriCk for BaseCourse (BRRL)

Aggregate Lrushing Value (ACV) - not greater than 30 percent J

Los Angeles Abrasion{LAA) - not great er than 34 percentv'

Average Cru shing Strength - not less than 5000 psi j(bricks only)

water Absorption - not greater than 9 percent

Plasticity Index of Fines - no t greater than 6 percentJ

A typical grading envelope for a~l in crushed brick

aggregate is shown in Table 2.6 whicn employes a continuous

graded brick (or stone) material of maximum size 37.5-50 mm

(It - 2").

Table 2.6 Grading Limits for a~l in Crushed Aggregate BaseMaterial (From BRRL Guide)

Sieve size Percent passingby weight

50 mm 100

37. 5 mm (1t" ) 90-lUO

20 mm (i" ) 60-BO,.,,

10 mm (i" ) 40-60

5 mm (No. 4) 30-452. 3 mm (No.B) 20-35600 urn (No. 30) 12-2576 urn (No. 200) 5-15

-<,,",,.IL

CHAPTER-3

MATERIALS

3.1 General

The design of a pavement is valid only if the materials

of construction meet the specification. For high~ay construc-

1lI!

tions various alternate materials are available byt the

pavement should be constructed with the materiaAs having

properties to give sufficient stability and durability. In

flexible pavement, base course is the main structural compo-Inent to distribute the superimposed load to the subgrade. If

II

\i

there is some failure in the base course due to the weaknesses

type of distress gradually

after being progressive;

ieads to the eventual failure of the road. The properties

in the material, deterioration

dhuckholes may be formed. This,

i

of these materials individually or the mixture as a wholeare of such criticaA importance to pavement life that examplee

of pavement failure traceable to improper material selection

and use ere numerious. Therefore,' special amphasis must be

given for the selction of materials for construction of base

and subbase courses. The materials dealt with are those

consisting of artificially prepared bricks and natural sand

and. soil. The one.of the objectives of this thesis is to

search for appropriate material for the construction of base

and subbase courses for flexible pavement. Following articles

ere viewed to classify and investigate the appropriate soil-

aggregate materials for such constructions.

34

3.2 Materials Used for the Research

The materials used in the mixture to be used in base

or subbase construction .consists 0 f cru shed brick, coarse

to medium sand and silt and c~ay fractions of soil. These

three components of the mixture were selected to meet the

desired gradation. Informations regllrding the evailebility

of the materials is contained in Appendix-A. For comparison

four types of bricks with different crushing strength and

abeorption were used. These bricks are locally named as

'Picked Jhama'; 'First Class' and' Third Class' (Description

of bricks are contained in Appendix-A). In addi"ion a compa-

rative study was made using stone aggregates. Main portions

of the coarse and fine aggregates in the mixture.were

obtained by crushing these bricks or stones. Very small

amount of materials between No. B mesh sieve to No. 200 mesh

sieve are obtained during crusning of bricks. To meet the

grading requirement between No. B mesh sieve to No. 200 meeh

sieve some coarse to medium sand was blended. Informations

regarding the typical hand crusning of bricks and stones are

contained in Appendix-B.

Properties of the different types .of bricks used in

the study are tabulated in Table 3.1.

Boulders used to get the stone aggregates hsve average

crushing strength of 15,500 psi and absorption of 1.65 percent.

35

Table 3.1 Properties of Bricks

Properties

Colour andBurning condition

••Averagea brick,

weight ofIb s

'Gas burntpickedjhama '

Blackishred/overbu rnt

7,55

Coalburntpickedihame

Blackishred/overburnt.'6.36

Firstclass

Red/wellburnt

6,15

Thirdclass

Pale red/underburnt

5.66

i

Average crushingstrength, psi.

Av~rage absorption,percent

5050

11.0

3575

11.03

3130

12,25

1375

••Average velues are taken from at least ten samplesselected at random.

Sand used as fine aggregate has a fineness modulus

of 2.70 and a specific gravity of 2,59.

Soil used as fines passing No. 2UO sieve has a specific

gravity 2.72 and unit waight of 113.5 Ib/cft (dense condition),

These materials were used to have 'coarse aggregate'.

'fine aggregate' and' fines' in the mixture,

3.2.1 Coarse Aggregate for the Study

Coarse aggregate has been defined as that portion of

the mixture which is retained on No. 10 sieve. The coarse

aggregates contribute to the stability of the mixture by

interlocking and frictional resistance of adjacent aggregate

particles to displacement.

36

Coarse aggregates ware obtained by crushing the bricks

or boulders (for stona aggregate). The crushing was done

manually and brought to the sizes of one inch or less. The

aggregates were then sieved using U.S~ standard sieves and

separated out in different fractiona. They wera then washed

and dried and combined in appropriate proportions of designed

gradations.

3.2.2 fina Aggregate for the Study

fine aggregate is that portion of the aggregate

material in ths mixture which passes No. 10 sieve and is

retained on a No. 200 sieve. fine aggregate contributes to

the stability of the mixture through interlocking and internal

friction and also by filling the voids in coarse aggregate.

After crushing briCKs or boulders it is seen thet all of

the fine aggregates required for a well graded mixture are

not obtained. Therefore some sa~d is to be blended with the

crusned aggregate to meet the grading specification. for

the gradations considered in this work coarse to medium sand

having finenass modulus between 2.5 to 3.0 is required to be

mixed. The fine aggregate in the mixture is therefore a

mixture of crushed bricK or stone and sand.

3.2.3 fines Used for the Study

fines are that portion of the mixture which passes No.200

sieve. They largely are visualized as void filler material in

."

37

the mixture. Fines are used in a well graded dense mixture

in amounts ranging from 5 to 15 percent by weight. From

crushing of overburnt picKed jhama bricK a negligible

amount of fines are obtained. The major portion of the

fines is obtained by mixing dry powdered soil which is the

cheep est among the available mateDials. In mo~t cases the

subgrade ,soil or soil from adjacent site can be mixed with

aggregate blend to have the desired percentage of fines in

the mixture.

3.3 Test Procedures for Determining Physical Propertiesof Aggregates

Coarse Aggregate: Tests required to determine the

physical properties of coarse aggregates are loose and

dense unit weight, specific gravity, water absorption,

percent wear by Los Angeles Abrasion. All iliese tests were

performed according to ASTM standard 1979 and AASHO standard.

1971. In Table 3.2 the test results of coarse aggregates

obtained from different types of bricks and boulders are

summarized.

According to AASHTO specification M19S-65, the maximum

dry loose unit weight of light weight aggregate for struc-

tural concrete is 55.U Ib/cft. Table 3.2 shows that the unit

weight of all types of bricks particularly gas burnt picked

jhama briCK is much above 55.0 Ib/ft3• Hence bricKs used

38

cannot be treated as light weight aggregate. But these

unit weight values indicate that they are lighter compared

to the conventional natural aggregates.

From the specific gravity records it is seen that

the differences between the apparent and bulk spec~fic

gravities for brick aggregates are ~ucn higher than the-

Table 3.2 Physicai Properties of Coarse Aggregates

Type of coarse aggregateName of the test ASTM/AASHO Gas Coal First Cru shed

designa- burnt burnt class stonetion picked picked brick

jhama j hama

Unit weight, C29-78 75.72 72.68 68.98 101.75lb/cft

Bulk speci fic Cl27-77 2.06 1.96 1.76 2.59gravity

Apparent speci fic Cl27-77 2.49 2.37 2.31. 2.66gravity

Absorption, Cl27-77 7.29 7.99 10.32 0.66percent

Percent wear Cl31-76 32.00 35.00 40.00 29.50in LAA

same for stone aggregates. This is due to high absorption of

brick aggregates.

The percent wear in Los Angeles abrasion for gas burnt-

picked jhama bricK is lower than those for other types of

bricks. This is because of the high crushing strength of gaa

burnt picKed jhama brick (see Table 3.1).

.-. '.',

39

The absorption of brick aggregates are about lU times

that of stone aggregates indicating that the bricks contain

much more water permeable pores compared to boulders or

stones.

fine Aggregate: Tests were pe:formed on fine aggregates

to determine the loose and dense unit weight, .specific gravity

and water absorption. The fine aggregates were mixtures of

finer portion crushed brick or stone and sand. The results

obtained for different fine aggregates are listed in Table 3.3.

Three types of fine aggregates, mixing sand with fine portions

of gas burnt brick, first class brick and crushed .stone were

considered. Eighty to ninety percent .and were used in the

mixture.

Table 3.3 Physicel Properties of fine Aggregates

Name of Test ASTM/Designa-tion

Type of fIne aggregatesSand plus Sand plusgas burnt first classpick jhame brickbrick

Sand pluscru shedstone

Unit weight,lb/cft

Speci ficgravity(apparent)

Absorptionpercent

C29-78

Cl27-77

Cl27-77

83.65

2.62

4.23

82.34

2.61

5.15

103.75

". " ...

40

About ten to twenty five percent of the total fine

aggregates required in the mixture can be obtained during

the hand crushing of brick s or stones. The lower value is

for materials having higher crushing strength. The rest

of the fine aggregates may be used by mixing appropriate

sand. Table 3.3 ShOWS that the unit weight and specific

gravity decrease when crushed bricks are mixed with sand

and these values with stone chips remain more or less same

as that of sand. The absorption of the brick aggregate-sand

mixture is much higher than that for stone screenings-sand

mixture.

fines: The specific gravity of the natural fines was

determined according to ASTM standard C128-68 and the value

is 2.72. The unit weight of fines was determined accordingc:

to ASTM standard C29-71 and the values are 61.3 lb/cft at

loose state and 73.2 lb/cft at dense state. These values ara

tabulated in Table 3.4. A hydrometer analysis of fines to

determine the grain size distribution was also done and tha

results are tabulated in Appsndix-C.

Table 3.4 Physical Properties of fines

Name of the test

Specific GravityUnit weight (loose)lb/c ftUnit weight (dense)lb/cft

ASTMDesigna1:ion

Cl28-68C29-71

C29-71 73.2U

•

CHAPTER-4

LABURATORY INVESTIGATION AND TEST RESULTS

The ptoperties of the materials as discussed in

Chapter 3 reveal that aggregates obtained from the gas

burnt bricks are suitable for base and subbase constructions

from the consideration of strength and toughnesS. With these

brick aggregates-sand-soil mixture first a suitable gradstion

was found out after performing CBR tests for different

gradations described in Artic~e 4.1. With the gradation

giving maximum CBR value then a search ~as made by varying

amount of fines to fin~ ths optimum percsnt fines and finally

a gradation with optimum fines is suggested.

After the gradation of the mixture ~as found, comparative

studies ~ere made bet~een different types of brick and stone

aggregate:s. If excess amount of clay material is present in

the mixture, when mixed ~ith water, the mixture bscomes

plastic. This type of material is not suitable for base

course construction. The plasticity of the mixture depends

on the portion of the mixture passing No. 40 sieve. An

investigation is therefore carried to find the plasticity

characteristics of the portion of the mixture passing No.40

sieve.

A relstion batween the compactive efforts and CBR

values were also established. The laboratory works done for

the research and the tsst results are discussed in the

following articles.

42

4.1 Density-Gradation Relationship

Initially fi0e aggregate gradations were selected

from available literature. these gradatione are listed

in Table 4.1. The grain size distribution bands are shown

in Figs. 4.1 to 4.5. The gradations are designated as

Xl,X2,x3,X4 and XS' Gradation Xl waa taken from the reco-

mmendations of Bangladesh Road Research Laboratory for

aggregate crusher run base (shown in Table 2.S). ~radation

X2 and X3 are chosen from the AA5HO standard M147 grade

A and B (Table 2.1). X4 is the gradation in Road Note No.31

of TRRL, U.K. for untreated crushed aggregate base (Table

2.3 - It inch maximum size). From specifications of California

Division of Highways gredetion Xs was selected (It inch

maximum size of Table 2.2). From the combined plot of all

the gradations (Fig. 4.6) an arbitrary gradation was selected

from the analysis of the results of all the above gradations

in view to have the best results. That final gradation is

gradation Z (Fig. 4.7). Table 4.1 shows gradation Z with

other gradations for comparison.

Coarse aggregates, fina aggregates,' sand and soil

were mixed together in proportions as specified in these

gradations and optimum moisture content and maximum dry

density were found for these mixtures according to the

standard AA5HO compaction method under A5TM designation

D696-76. The results of these compaction tests are shown

(.

43

in a concised form in Table 4.2. The moisture content- density

graohs are plotted in Figs. 4.8 to 4.10. The line of lero Air

Void (ZAV) also is plotted with the help of average apparent

specific gravity of tl3combined mixture. CIJR tests were performed

samples at respective optimum moisture contents.

Table 4.1 Aggregate Gradation Requirements of Different

Organisations and the Selected Gradation l.

Sieve Percent Finer for Gradationssize

,Xl X2 X3 X4 X5 Z

2 inch 100 100 100 100

1+ inch 90-100 100 90-100 95-1001 inch 75-95

i inch. 60-80 80-100 50-85 70-90

t inch 40-60 30-65 40-75 55-80 50-68Na.4(3/16") 30-45 25-55 30-60 40-60 30-45 38-50NO,8 20-35 30-50 28-40No.lO 15-40 20-45

No.3o 12-25 15-30 10-25 15-22No. 40 8-20 15-30

No. 200 5-15 2-8 5-25 5-15 2-9 8-12

4,2 Effect of Gradation on CBR Value

Picked jhama Brick chips with sand and soil at different

gradations were compacted in the laboratory to find the CBR

-"

AGGREGATE GRADATIONCHART

B. S. STANDARD SIEVES

--'",

t I' 'I ¥#l:t :=J--ll~E=200 10080 '>0 (.0 30 20 15

o.lu.JiZ

«>-IU)IO!

t:-~Zw.u<r'.JJ0..

-'«1--oI-

21'1)0o10f--20

30

80

10072 ~.2 3(.

108 4

"410090

80

<.?70 z-

lJ)lJ)50 «0..

,>0>-zw40 u<rw30 a.

20 -'«I-010 I-

•~u. S. STANDARD

FIG. 4.1 GRADATION Xl (BRRL)

r-r-

[1

",p':;;' .;II .~'"',.~'~.~:~:SI7:

i.J1

iI


B.S. STANDARD SIEVESI,

4100

90

80

..::>70 z-

V\V\60 <J:CL

SO >---zwLO u0:::W30 CL

-'20 <J:t-o

10 t-

u. S. STA NDAR D

200

10

20

30

90~1

S 2 3 L 18, L 3 " 12" 3 L' 1" " ~' 21~"3"I '_L---t---r !

---+-L :~I--J--- ,- I+i-- 1-+=--EFBl---I-=H-- ---- i

': I I I --t--t---r-: ----j !j I r-f--I-i-!----i-J-.~. ,~--

LOI I; -+-j--!-I---1----I-I~--L- --, I ~ i '--+--+- I L_J __ I L1__ -----l---t illI I I ill I I I ' ; ,cor -.---~.__L-.._-l--_ -~~ I I

J " I" .~ " I -,---r-;i----~+---._.1- , -,_ i I . : .[I ; I '_'_L_' I i I :6 0 i: I" • I' , -,----.----.

! I I ~ t L. --I'---l..--I I i I I I I

701 I I ! i I--~ --+--:--!~-- I ; i!j -' --------t I I .I I: I' I ' 'Ii ~I !: I

, -", Iii I-I' -,. i '------t-- I ; ~- i I

, ., I' I-L __ , ,.------<--- :!t=----,-, "

iii: : I I IIIJ:::: I---T-----i '010080 SO LO 30 20 16 . 108 L 318'11t 3/4" 1" 1'/2' 2' 2lfh" L'

SIEVES

80

t--

Zwu0:::WCL

owZ

<J:>---W0:::

--'<J:>---o>---

FIG.4.2 GRADATION X2 (AASHO)I1

~ ~-~"~,.,

.•...v<

:...+_~-=,,::::lIi

:oJ- __ ,.,J


~70 z-

Lf)Lf)

60 <t(L

SO t-

Zw1,0 u0::W30 a..

20 ...J<tt-o

10 t-

80

90

I .LJU4

U.S. STANDARD

~-

B.S. STANDARD SIEVES. .:)().-J.QO 72 52 31. 18 11, 7 3116" 31B" 12" 31," 1" 3" 1,';00

r- If+ETI-~II J==''" -LL_L I

o'~_~__L! I~ <----- '. " L I I 'I" 1 i"' !--~--,- ------f_----,--

: I ! -I l~--f-~! : ,,i "r---lil : !-~--+-----1-" I I

I-------r-~-~-j- , . l__ U ---+-.....-I ,: i I ! 'I' I I , ,I L_L :r--Tt i ~ i 1-1---\-1 -- -I--l---i/ -r-t--;f--~_: __.L_~ I [ L n-~-=i ' I I -;t-L i .1 ; :__ i :...4, ' I L.L-J'-- __ , - i I ~ __ ; i ! ! i !

I . I I . , _L_~--l __ ~:__ : II! 'I~~. . i' , I 1 ,i

! i i : ~ 'II Iii'i e--- I iii!

I --1--1 - __L__ -I; I I

~ I i_100 I i I I 0

200 10080 SO 1.0302016 108 I, 3!8'l!t 3/1,'1" 11r2'2'21/h'I.'51EV ES

0

10

0 20wz- 30<t•....W0:: /'0•...-z SOwu0:: 60w(L

70...J<t•.... 800t-

90

I

ii

iFIG. 4.3 GRADATION X3 (AASHO)

~'~

E"-O>

;.:;> l .••. _-" ",.dO.

~f••~

I,!

AGGREGATE GRADATIONC HART

...J20 <l:

>-o>-

1.0

10

30

-:>70 :z:

l/ll/l

50 <l:0...

,,>0 >-

zwU0::WlL

80

90

"1.100

_ Uo1\/22' 2\12'3" I.'3/8' 112" 3/1." 1"

SIEVES

I.108

U.S. STANDARD

18 11.J.1

B.S. STANDARD SIEVES

7 315" •I I. 1" "" 1 "I ' 2 2123"

i 1__ 1_ tL~,L--1I' '~,--1..._I ! -f-e_1 ii'LL-i-:------f-.- fII I'i

~

' ,_""; i .,__ L.. +-1-l--J, I' _. ,,"

, ._ ..t-I--- I '"I I I I .' ,i

i i [--,--J--: ! -l! i I' : II : I' ! . .t-I---; ,r-- I ', .' • , ' . ' t.1 1 ' I-Ii I t \' I ::! , " I

i I I 'j t • j' i

___.'----1.- " - ,,"i : 1--'- I I, ,.;---+ .,'~_ I I I I

~+--~I_ I I ' I I I I "I$_~: Ii l~ [: II~ I i I -r- : : II ! -+--i- I, i

I

_ I !' ,iiI ,I . ,

II

v

t

10080 50 1.0 30 20 15

100 72 52 3 I.2.00oo

I.v

50

20

30

50

80, ~

70

90c

100200

...J<l:>-o>-

>-zwu0::W0...

owZ

<l:>-W0::

FIG ..4.4 GRADATION XI. (RN 31,TRRLJ.•.....•

AiIl..~1 -

zo~<l.o<l.n::t-l.')n::

<l.wIru<l.l.')

wet:l.')l.')

<l.

o::>

V1W> u)

lJJ

V1

Cl0::«ClZ

~V1

8'0

o(7)-

o

o00

o. '"

oM

o 0

cD '"

o'"

o,.., oN

Clu::

--.1 «ClZ

, «l-

t ;-+- '0 V1t~l ;2 V1

+__ cD -::l

j- ~I,_ 0i MI 0r --~i .n

o00oo

oo'"

:r:ou~U>

X

zo~«o«0:::l.')

1.,8

03NIV13CJ 1N3:JCJ3d 1V101

- -~

••>


90

80...:>

10 zIIIV'l60 et0-

:,0 .-zUJ40 ua:.w30 a..~

20 <tt-o

'0 t-

"lilOO

o3/8',p' 1/4"" Nl 2' 2V2" 3' "4

a.s. STANDARD SIEVES

200 lOQ 72 ')1 j. '6 ,~ I "'"'''',!8" V). 1'4' 1" ,II, • 2\. •

I I i . I I : : / ~ ~

--+- -_. [ ~ r II / // W) I : I ! T /'/ /r~ i

+- i/ /1 // V / II I ' H-i ,

) ii - --1-- -- 1/ /.1 Ii I } I

I

i // :",1 / /1) ! 77 p / i 1

! 7' .-1' / .' /, i I

!, /' // / / I \ I

DI , ~/ -/ /1 / II , i

I , '" ." V/ I 1/ ii

, , ~ r' ~ '/ //: i,~ i I ~I ...:;•..• / ./ / ,

: J~/ -'" '1 1/ r=' /D-- I -...- ~ ,.../ .7 ....--' I..-----:: .......- /-1 1/ .. .'/ ,

i

)

,______ I ~. ~' !~. .-: '"

.. T ,

/. ~~ i0~- I

f- , I i i I :

9

I,

5

2

8

100---200 1flO80 ')0 1.0 30 20 16 '0 B

s

7

1

,.----'«>-o

owZ<1:>-Wa:>-~W

.Ua:W0..

U.S.STA,Wt..RD SIEVES

FIG._L6, GRA OAT IONS SUPERIMPOSED

. ')I

'~~/ r-lD _ ~.

;'

:11: , ., ."

AGGREGATE GRADA110NC HART

I-

ZWu0::W(L

...J20 <l:

>-o>-

~70 ~

Lf)Lf)60 <l:

CL

10

30

(,0

SO

80

90

"1,100

! I

II I! I 0

,1/2' 2' 21!h" I.'

,"2&I,

...~_+__---~---: -.f------t--- ..+i ! : !.l! i

108 I, 3i8' 1i2" 3!1,"1"

_;...-4 ;--__ -~

iSO 1.0 30 20 16

i~__

i----t-------;----------- ,I:' -r _1 .1

10080

____l i.. --__ +-_

I '

0400

10

20

30

60

so

90

80

70

100200

B. S. STANDARD SIEVES

31. 1811. 7 3116"

i I ~-J--lJ---~.-~i~1--1. I \ i! \- ! . I: r L ,. I I , I i

--Li---- ---~----,-+---L--- + \ +----~-t_I_J __ L_~;_i-J ~i __ ~J i -t

I . : i J i! j i.'__ 1-.[-~_:__L'-=!=-~~~:t~~_~r-_=;--!

"e-~~~l-,~~=~ef~;~;-j-~~~.~r-u, . L... ~'I' I' - . i' I--=;-~~-=~-~-------====~==t~--~-~.~-=i i _-' _-1.'

owZ

<l:>-W0::

r'Zwu0::wCL

...J<l:>-o>-

U.S.STANDARD SIEVES

FIG.4.7 GRADATION Z(SELECTED GRADATION)

I

"r~? U'o

~

51

Table 4.2 Moisture Density-Gradation Data

Moisture Wet •. Dry- ,Optimum Maximum

Gradation content density density moisture dry-density(%) " lb sl c ft lbs/cft content(%) lb sl c ft

5.0 115.0B 109.60 [:7.5 120.50 112.1,0

Ii,Xl 10.0 126.17 114.70 13.0 1'17.9~'.I

(':'i<J

12.3 132.17. 117.7f:l

14.5 133.39 116.50

16.0 133.05 114.70

5.0 ' 114.34 loB.90

7.3 120.33 112.15

X2 10.0 125.95 114.50 12.5 117.0,!.\

12.5 131.62 117.00,

15.0 133.70 116.30

17. 0 131.27 112.20

5.0 115.17 110.20

9.0 124.26 114.00

X312.5 132.30 117. 60 13.5 116.0

15.0 134.55 117.00

17 •4 135.12 115.10

Table 4.2 (Contd •••••

52

Moi sture .Wet. Dry- Optimum MaximumGradation content density density moi sture dry-density

( % I lbs/cft lbs/cft content(%l lbs/cft

5.0 117.2B 111.7

7.5 123.41 114. B

X4 10.0 129.25 117.5 12.5 120.5

12.0 134.40 120.0

13.5 135.B5 119.7

15.5 133.90 116.0

5.0 116.13 110.6

8.75 124.0B 114.1

X5 11.75 129.85 116.2 13.0 116.5

14.0 132.56 116.0

17.0 133.3B 114.0

z

5.0

7.59.75

13.0

15.0

115.50

124.42

134.20

lLO.O

113.0

116.1

119.0

116.7

13.0 119.0

125

130

•

.. 1tr

ZAV - Density CurvelAvg. App. Sp, Gr.: 2.59)

IIIIIII')IIIIIII I II

5 10 15 20

MOISTURE CONTENT •IN PERCENT OF DRY WT.

(8)

Gradation X2

"0'-

105

120

125

no

20

Z AV - Den s.' ty Curve(Avg. App. Sp. Gr.=-2.61)

5 '0 15

MOISTURE CONTENTIN PERCENT OF DRY WT,"

(AI

/'

Gradation X,

-----------------

110

1\5

105o

>-~lJlZuJo>-a:o

~I.J.ul 120"-lJl(D....I

FIG. 4.~ MOISTURE- DENStT'( RE LATIONSHIP:(A) FOR GRADATION X, (8) FOR GRADATION X2 ~

(7, "~. t... -- -"'" .~_:...; -=-....-~" C"::.:._~.. ..• j

"'

12':>1- Gradation x3

20

ZAV- Dens',ty Curve( Avg. App. Sp. Gr.:2.6t.l

5 10 15

MOISTURE CONTENTIN PERCENT OF DRY WT

(Bl

Gradation xI.

--------------

105o

110'-

120

115

no

20

ZAV - Den si ty CurvelAvg. App. Sp.Gr.=2.671

125

/

10 15

MOISTURE CONTENTIN PERCENl OF DRY WT.

P

(Al

':.

--------------

lOSo

11':>

110

120

no

<flZlJJCl

~Cl

...-u..'-'.••..<flCD--l

'"rt-

,'jl<''f':,."

FIG.4.9 MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP:(A) FOR GRADATION X) (B) FOR GRADATION X" ;:

20

WT.

15

ZAV - Dens; ty curve(Avg. app. sp. g'. = 2.63)

10

MOISTURE CONTENTIN PERCENT OF DRY

(B)

5

Gradation Z.

105 o

130

ZAV - Dens;ty curve(Avg. app. sp. g'.~2.':>9) 125Gradation X,:>

lOS' I I; I I.o 5 10 15 20

MOISTURE CONTENTIN PERCENT OF DRY WT.

( A)

12':>

130

t-

tl 120r.....\1\

\

m...J

120

>--------

t-

\1\ 115zuJ0

"'\

~I

11':>

110~/x

, 110

FIG.4.lO MOISTURE- DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: (A) FOR GRADATION Xs (B) FOR. GRADATION Z. ~. .I'l "- _...•

, .•.." _J

56

value of the compacted mixture. The test was performed follow-

ing the orocedure in A5TM DIB83-73 and AASHO T-193-63. The

moisture content during compaction was maintained to be

optimum, Six samples were prepared at a particular compactive

effort. The dry densities of the compacted specimens were

measured, The compacted specimens were ,subjected to. four

days soaking period applying 10 Ibs surcharge and providing

swell measuring arrangements, :owell measured after the soaking

period was very negligible. Soaked specimens after 15 minutes

of free drainage were tested in the te1ting machines (Figure,C-l to C-6 in Appendix-C). After plotting the data in Figs.4,ll -

4.16 corrected soaked CSR values were ~btained. For all the

samples CBR values at 0,1 inch penetration are higher than the

values at 0,2 inch penetration, with different compactive

efforts, dry density and CSR values ar~ plotted in Figs, 4.17

to 4,19, The CRR values for 100 percent standard AASHO maximum,"Idensities were obtained from CSR-density plots and compared

for different gradations in Table 4,3.

4,3 Effect of Fines on CSR Values

By varying the percent fines from zero to twenty in

gradation Z, CBR values were determined with gas burnt picked

jhama bricks, The results of this investigation are tabulated

in Table 4,4 and plotted in Figs. 4,20a ~ 4,20c, The percent

fines versus CBR and dry density are plotted in Fig, 4,21,

2S002S00

._---~----•••••~

~

r:r40')

-:-0)'1-'~ 1.e~ ,)

~

e c..&R::;.4fDi"

GO el-O I ..;

\B eJ-ow~ ,G'e,:z.::.4oi'. '."

0'2

PENElRATION IN INCHES~

lS00

1000

2000

0'4

.r

0'3

,QI.-olN';' eeR:O ':>0'/.

~o..... .,~tr156L-Dw' ,ceR=c39/,

o ,{,cP<iL-:-0 .....,

'l'l!!>'e>••.•o",">

0'2

PENETRATION IN IN CHES~..L-~-"

0"

FIG.4.11a CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION xtl/"

Via..T lS00

2000

zwa..o....wi 1000'uz«•...VlVlW0::

.' .~ 7:_~-'--':""- - -".-__.,; .:~ :-'~"'=--.~-: -"~=0

~, - ,--~~-

2500 2500

O'L,0.30'2Ocr0'1,0'30'2

2000r- .\ . LOOO,,">

~

.,.,,'O~ <Vc/o

'Il'!>' ~'~,,0 0.•••Vl '0 '0••.•a- 1500 j/ 1500 ",'?.z

".>wa- -?-o' ./

0 ~. - .;,.~.;I. '" ~ 491'c.?>•....!l}q '0""'- ';'J ~ •'tIe;;"C; ~\..PW 1000 e\..o 1000 ---- ___ '?J"u '?>O

Z0'" ~ 51':.,,3'31.<l: ~O' eL-o ••••~' c.•... •••

Vl Y \5 'OL.OW:> , C.5R: 4-z.1. •••.•• \?0« ,~VlW0:, SOOt- ~- -,- - Y'l' ,.;.....-- SOO~---

PENETRATION IN INCHES•• PENETRATION IN INCHES

""FIG.4.11b CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRIGcK- lGRADATION Xl.) ~

,--..'-- -----......;\.•

~.-..--,... ) --~

'"

2 500 2500

2000 2000

I I II i I

II I I I I I0-' 0'2 0"3Cl'~o

O' ~'0'3O'Loo

lilt ~ ~ee;I', ~ 'fn. "'-' e'3 '1500 c,'" . ",R" ¥-'i. «>,,0<''''' 1500 0"'''' ' c,"'~w ",<:> e>" .....~

n.

o<-

7'w 1000 - </)" ~~ _ _ _ _ __ ,,"e, CBR ,,4B'/. 1000t Y eeR= 1,94: '" \..P " 0 y/ e ,t- 1'"30 - - - - - - - ~o B'-III I ~\\III ","Wi,,"'" l'3e\-owe,.CBR=-~ai'. ' ",,, ..0::1 c~~ ' ?",.>\o~ 0 I I "'.~ \",B~O'N"" cel{~:;"'.l,

500

PENETRATION IN INCHES PENETRA TION IN INCHES•••FIG.4.11c CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION XI)

ltd

IIi -- ,1

--

2500 2500

2000'- 2000

\'5 e\...o"" ~, ceR:::' 34./.

~o.",\...ow~,c.eR~ "'''1.

IY'I,

'Bl..Owoz" c.eR.::' '30.

0')

'''' e.\...o"'" c."R ~ 39 ~!,

oo

500

1000

1500

0'40'3

C- '0"- -= 'Bw 'f. "-~;••0-tJ:;;.,:

",'" :--- 'f..

I

0'20'1

1000

1500~

V'lC-

.zwC-

o>-

wuZ<>-V'l

Vlwa::

PENETRATION IN INCH~S PENETRATION IN INCHE..?

FIG.4.12aCBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION X2.)C1\o

'Ii;'", ~

,~

2500.- 2500

0'40'2 003

PENETRATION IN INCHES••

2000

0- "0'2 0-3

PENETRATION IN INCHESI

2000

",{,c.""",'3'Cl'Z>'1500L - '0,-0

<b-~.,~t.1~'1 1'/,

_l.ll.

-'"c.1!l1l -

c..'B~-

.'> ~••••••

",••.•0

... e\..o'?Jo: 1000~ _____

'!> •• 1-

• 4\'/.

~ ~,C""R~0"- J >

o~ e.~o~

0

•• \'5

~~. I

",<1"', . ~(), I~

~1000

'0,-0 °W

15 I

u --

o ,

ZoCt

500

~VlVlw

500 --a::

FIG.4.12b CBR F'OR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS .BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION Xl)

.;

~

.~~}. "'<::.-:l 'C:::)

a>.•.•.,~ ::.

--,--",.

2'5002'500

2000200

0'40'30"2 .0'1o0'40'30'20'1

o o

lIl1 . ~ <:-el'- __O)'2:/O I eFl':c9!+'{'

~ lS00. e\o-o'('l~' 1. 15001- (o~e"'O'fl~'Cz ~~wa.

~

~ 1000 oW'e.cep;:.loei" 1000~ / c:.eQ.:c1<9"f.Z '!)o el- . - - - -' el-o'l'ltl •<t ~c>.1 ~ c&R_::' ?le;t. . . '!>o

til 9.... ISeL-O'I'I ' I f I e;- , "III '!) l'\.O,I~ • 9.... e\.OWtl ,C&R:37,.w 9"" I ~ ," P.> 0 0cr _ u ~ I .. , .••0, .

500

PENETRATION IN INCHESJlov PENETRATION IN INCHES

II>

FIG.4.12c CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION X21.)'

.~' ~.:-"j

! ,..- :< ~ ,

jCD.N

, ..," ~

...

S-~72--~,

2500 2500

2000 2000

0'40'30'20"10"1,0'30'2oo

l/l

0-1 1500r c~ 1500~...l~'Zl1J0-f2

Y • ",0 'f.l1J 1000 ~.

c'B~ -

lOOO~ 7'"u

-----;.' .,., oW5 '

~ ~,?>O e\-

O~':l'Z _____ _ ~o 'i3\..<l:w~ ' caR:' "'37{. I '"o~ w" CeR~ ,oi',

t-I ",l/lI .,'< \ ':) T3 \..0 --0--- J .•.• ~. '5 aLO ----Cl_l/l ' ,

,~ ()

l1J0::, 5001=----,,1-- -'-7(' ~ 50

PENETRATION IN INCHES~ PENETRATION IN INCHES

, "':)'

FIG.I,.r3a CBR FOR DIFFERENT SRECtMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA

--BRICK (GRADATION X3l enw

,i,

~

\

2500 2500

2000 2000

O'l,OC10'2O'l,0'30'20'1

il 15°°1'2.'"

150°1_ &11,

~~t.6~-•••••"," . e"oe"o fI>">,.<;

c..0•....•

1000rw 1000 r c"~ ~ 48'/'u

ceR = 47.'/.e>~o,"~I _____ r-

Z "" "!10 A< ow'eJ .•....• ,,0 el.:VI

~ I I I ~~+-~ BL-O"'f>, I C.6Jt:. ~~7,VI 'i"" A BLOWS. c.aR = 34."1, I ,<;w ,_<l _ ,~ '15'a: 500

PENETRATION IN INCHES PENETRATION IN INCHES---FIG.4.13b CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION X)

0>ZOo

:/'~.-{ --'"

.,

2500 2500

2000 2000

o ~

e\..oW5, ceR==-~\'I.

03

\'3 e\.-OW~' caR'::. 3(,°/,~-

~

o 2o 1o ~0302o 1oo

~I 1500~ ~~ c"'''' 1500"'~.'0\-0 .

Z' , ",'!> ~W(L

0t-

wi 1000uz r---]f<l: 'fI~ cllR= 41'/.t- 30 8\..0, 4_III

~ .lil •.....~~~ \5 a\..OW~ J C8R -= 31 'I.e:: 500

FIG.4.1"3c CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION X3),PENETRATION IN INCHES PENETRATION IN INCHES

-.enU'l

" ~.--:;

25002500

0'40'30'2PENETRATION IN INCHES. -

0'10'40"30'2PENETRATION IN INCHES

••

0'1oo

2000,2000

_ \07.'1'

IS,J~~

5t lSOO~

c.:a'\1.- "' ••. -'1'15' c.13,-0 O"~' ~

~C/'-wa..0~ -----/ <.,,1<='5?>'/.W 1000 ovl!:; I

1000u '30 el.z II I -j: w"', <.8" = 49'/.< I' el-o0.""1 ?>ol- I "', '" \'5 el-oW5. e"" = 4<;'Y, 'o'~Vl- I e.,'1YA"'" " 131-0"" , C8"; 4si'.Vl ' 0 ~,",' 113

Wa::: I 500. ., - 500

FIG.4.14a CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF (,AS BURNT PICKED JHAMA enBRICK (GRADATION X4) en

'"-t.:...

",

t•

2500

"'

0'2_1-0") 0"4

2500

0"2 0') 0"4

PENETRATION IN INCHES. ~ PENETRATION IN INCHES

FIG.4,14b CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION X4) '""

,iT

L~

J

2500 2S00

t'

2000 2000

0' "0']

150aLO,"~ ,CbR ':. 411.

~o eL-o"''''c ~ ~'50'/.-

0'2

_,00'/'

~o. ~,,'

C')</

0'10'"

1500

_\..o ••~~/,~~' -'IS t!>'-o"" ,c.llR ~~~'I.1000

.0']0'20'1oo

Vl

~I 1500zwa..oI-wi 1000 _uz<l:I-VlVlWcr I SOO

PENETRATION IN INCHES•• PENETRATION IN INCHES

FIG.4.14c CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION X,)~

"

2500 2500

O! I,0""30'20"ooO'l,0'30"20"1

0_0'

2000r 2000

CD'/'~, '(2.~ec.~1500 "" f> •",0 . 1500

1

.,'?>c6t:<. - 87:/'Z '"W B~o~~~ ~

a.. \CO'"

O'0

..;:.>- ~.w 1000 V)« , 000u eel'<::' /),0'/.z« IPw"'" r------ -- :e "/ eLoWe. , C8R ::.4'"/,>- ~o ceo\<.= "3co • .III e.L.-o Y'4 ~ ) "30

III,<;

500 I ~w

I","'" 1'3 B'-OW"" caR= 3"1-

a: 500 ~ _~.~.~9 0

PENETRATION IN INCHEStao PENETRATION IN INCH~S

FIG.l,.11SaCBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION Xs) ~

.' .

.,

-:-:;

2':>00 2':>00

2000 2000

r.'" ~I-Ow"" CllR~73'{'

30 a\..ow ~ • c. 8~:'40"/.ti '\1'3 aI-oWl), ell" =34'{.

0'4

1'3BLOW'. CBR:3oi'.

0'3

30

"1.-0"'''' c."'" 3""/'

Co"It = .,,,,1,e\..o"'~.•

••<'

~f"".~O.15o

0-20-100

1':>00

0- 40'3

VI

~I 1':>00.zI.LI11.

gtlll000z~VIVII.LIQ:

PENETRATION IN INCHES1>= PENETRATION IN INCH~.S

FIG.4.1SbCBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION Xs) ;.;.;, 0

I.

..

2500 2500

2000 2000

0;40'30'1,0'30'1oa

V'l

a..J 1500i 1500.z 0°; twa.. c.eR =- r

.p\-ow" ,g ,,'5

LJ.l 1000 1000 ~ t.. '?J'J.'OR-

U '("t'epcZ e\-o<l: LOWD, c13R" lto.f, ~o>- ~o e ~ _~I'(,V'l ,- ." 3 1 q~. e~ow~,c6~•i1J t-\Q e.\.-ow~,c..eR.-::::_O::. 0 •

". 15 '? .n \'5a:: 500 ,,"< .o'~ e SOD,. .

PENETRATION IN INCHES1Io

PENETRATION IN INCHES••FIG.I,.15cCBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION XS>

,-~...-..-~,, '

1/'~

0'40'30'20'1o oO'~0'30-20'1

2500r ....¥" 2500

,\,01,

~~4:-0

20001- OJ'/ 2000o~~v

"'"IIIG- 1500 1500z l Y

_ ,,0 'I.w ----yG- eaR-_ 5 '!>'f ' -otl'" ,

0

~

'0,,0I- ---- ,,0'1'15•

,?OW 1000 30 e 1000uz

~I I I I~ \5 B\..ow,",) ee>R=40/.OJ"?

1IIIWcrt 5001- I ,.)1 ....------ 500

PENETRATION IN INCHES PENETRATION IN INCHES•••FIG.4.16aCBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION Z)

;j

.:~. - ~'s. .

PENETRATION IN INCHES•

0'4

\'3 e,-OWf> , ceR:; 45'l.

~_ (0'/."/'

~""c,'O -e>"o

"!)o

•••

0'3IN INCHES

_ \,'!I'I'

,,'0 'i'--.;."> '

,,0~<t>

C;

0'1 0' 2

PENETRATION

500

ao

2500

1500

2000

1000

0'1,0'3

'_0'1,~o::."'"

c.~.,.'!>''(>,,0

~O

,\ '","",'~Q-

(J

"J'o~

<iTv"

0'20'1

W] 1000uz<l:r--Ul

I{]cr:

2000

1500Ul0..

2500

.zW

,0..

..~/

...•FIG.I,.16 b CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION Z) W

;j

-.

,

0'1,

_(oil'e1"--

,;\" , c.<bvo

0'3

-eo?----:"G

~'o-tl

<bY<,

C9

0'2

r..~o~.q

t?

0'1o o

500 _•

1500

1000

2500

2000

0'1,0"3

'?:J~~el.

\'5 e\.-OW~1 c'O'r'<-:'4'5/.

0'2

-<;-.0 ~"

'<~:~

0'1

2500

2000

ViCL.

11500

zwCL

0•....wi 1000(Jz<•....V!VlWcr

PENETRATION IN INCHES•• PENET RATION IN INCHES;10 ••••••~

FIG.4,16c CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMEN OF GAS BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK .(GRADATION Z )

o./~...I~. - \ ...• \. :,

-'

"

120 120

100

1201'5"0

60

80

30105

1,0

100

120

II .IJ

IIIIIIIII

115110

60

80~- - - - - ---------

1,0

30105

~

~f-ZWucrWQ.

crCOu

ow:x:~III

DRY DENS~Y AS MOLDED!PC~

IN

FIG.~.'~ C6R

DRY DENSITY AS MOL DED. PCF~

IS)

DENSITY RELATION: IA) GRADATION X, CB) GRADATION,. X2

...•""

F)1/ .~- ...•

"

~zwua::w0.

a::enu

ow:.::<oVI

;

125

lOa

80

60

~o

125

100

80

60

~O

~ 'I

~;.- --'..i

105 110 115 120 lOS 110 115 120

DRY DENSITY AS MOLDED. PCL

l A)DRY DENSITY AS MOLDED, PCF••

( B)•••••~

~I

;/

FIG.4.1HBR DENSIlY RELATION:{A) GRADATION X]lB) GRADATION'X4 i:,

~ .•..-----.;..T_~_'t.

-~,.~=--~:-~,.

120115110

/'0

80

30lOS

60

120

100

12011511030lOS

/'0

120

100

,

•....ZQJul 80crWll.

et:' ~------------ ..•..alu 60aw::c<loIII

FIG. 1<.19 CBROENSITY RELATION: (A) GRADATION Xs (B.) GRADATio'N Z

fJ

DRY DENSITY AS MOL DED, PCF~

(A)

DRY DENSITY AS MOLDED,PCF•

(8) ..,..., ..

. ~...--:~ - -..!.

'~-~--.--1

IIIlL

zWlL

o~wuZ<l:~Vl

IIIW0::

"

2500

2000

1500

1000

0'2

,c..efZ~~'

~ft'" A5/.c.'" f>. -=- 44'; 1.

0'3 O'l,

2500

2000

1500

1000

SOD

0'2

~_",,,.5'/'c.~ee.l'l = (,,2.5'1.

c'B~-=:'~o.O"/.cel"-'" '57.0/.

0'3 0"

PEN ETRAT ION IN INC H E 5

( A)

PENETRATION IN INCHES••(8 ) -..l

ao

..~i~f

FIG.~.20QC8R FOR DIFFERENT PERCENT OF FINES~(A) O'/.FINES (8) l,"l.FINES

VlCl.~

ZUJCl.

o>-UJuz«>-Vl

VlUJcr

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

,II11'1IIIIJI'I11II1I1I

_I0'1 0'2 0'3 0'4

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

00

,IIII

1"1

illI,ll

JUII

I ,III

0'1 0'2 0-3 0'4

.>

FIG.4.20b CBR FOR' DIFFERENT PERCENT OF FINES~.(A} 8°/. FINES (B) 12~. FINES

-.<>•. 'I>:'.~-tI?>.

PENETRATION IN INCHESIIJ

(A)PENETRATION IN INCHES•

(B) -..ll- •U) Ii,

II.,-~

...-fi

2500 2500

2000 2000

0.'40')I

0'2

III0-, 1~UUr- 0.%' 0~ --- 1500u _~, ._0.zW0-00-

W(JZ«V;-IIIWcr, r~~ IIII , ,

500

-

PENETRATION IN INCHES••IA)

FIG.I,.20c CBR FOR DIFFERENT PERCENT OF FINES~ lA)

PENETRATION IN INCHES110

(B )

16%FINES (S) 20'10 FINEScoo

•j.y~

110125

120:-------,~90

DRY

~115 lL

~

u

z 70

0-

ILlU

""~

0::

~

ILl

VI

0-

Zz

110 ~50

~el

0::0

II /"

10530

'0 o I, 8 12 16 20tOO

24PERCENT FINES ••

FIG.4.2t CBR DRY DENSITY PERCENT FINES RELATION e'"'

-~ ~

.' " ,F,

, 82

Table 4.3 CBR~Uensity-Gradation Relationship

Optimum Maximum CBR at 100

Gradation moisture dry density percent maximumcontent standard AA5HO densitypercent AA5HO percent

Ib/c ft

Xl 13.0 117.9 79 .5

X 12.5 117.0' 71.02

X] 13.5 118.0 77.5

X4 12.5 120.5 87.0

X5 13.0 116.5 65.0

l 13.0 119.0 97.0

Table 4.4 CBR-Density-Percent fines Relationship

83

4.4 CSR for Different Types of Agoregates

Sahd and soil were mixed with crushed chips of coal

burnt picked jhama brick, first class brick, third class

brick and crushed stone in gradation L fdr the comparison

of their stabilities in terms of CBR values, The molds were

compacted in accordance with standard AASHO procedure applying

optimum moisture content, The moistur~ content density rela-

tionships of these materials are shown in Fig, 4.22. The CSR

graphs of mixtures containing crushed stone. coal burnt

picked j hama brick, first class brick. third class brick are

shown in Figs, 4.23, 4.24, 4.25, and 4.26 respectively. The

CSR density relationships for crushed stone and coal burnt

picked jhama brick are shown in Fig, 4,27 and those for first

class brick and third class brick are shown in Fig. 4.28. The

penetration and resistance to penetration relations are shown

in Table A-l to A-IO in Appendix-A, The stability in terms of

CBR value of these materials are compared with that of gas

burnt picked jhama brick in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5 CBR for Different Types of Materials

ParameterGas burntpick edj hamabri ck

Coalburntpickedj hamabrick

Firstclassb ri ck

Thirdclassbrick

Crushedstone

Optimummoisture 13,0 14.5 15,0 16.5 10.5contentin percent-, Maximum dry-densi ty, 119,0 118.74 115,6 113.5 149.0Ib/ c ft

CSR valu e 97,0 74,0 62.5 42.0 94.0in percent

•• '/

I SO, _ ~ _ 125

201510s

10':1

2015105

110

lLOI- '", 120

rl-

I!.e.>

"Vl

~J 1301 I 11':1

>-I-

VlZW0,

1201 ' I 110>-a:0

MOISTURE CONTENT INIo

PERCENT OF DRY WT.

MOISTURE CON-lENT' IN ;0

PERCE'NT OF DRY WT.

llI>~

FIG.4.22 MOISTURE CONTENT - DENSITY RELATIONSHIP ( GRADATION - Z)

.,. .. ---~_ ..•'..-.~,_.--------- __~<""';;;-=-.c~::".: :-(

) '/

25002500

PENETRATION IN INCHES

•O'~

R" lOG>,/.c..B",', •••\..O~ .,

O~ ~COI.~ R '=-c.'"

n.PENETRATION IN INCHES

2000

1000

1500

O'~0'3

15 BLOWS. CBR.."" 9 'j,

e'-o'{i '" , C \3Y> ~ (PI 1.~o A _

0'20'1

2000

~.1500~zUJll.

gtjl 1000z«(

~V1

VIUJa::

FIG.4.23QCBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF CRUSHED STONE (GRADATION Z) CD

'"..,

-. ~- -.~ --- - .- - -~-y--~"-'~ - =-=--~...,.._, .-~:":::;;i-.~

,f ,)

250 2500

0'40'3

ro'" e\.o"'''"' ceR~ 104'f'JL

\< ~~~~. ...,.X~

x

~

eR-:'CtJ'l'"

~

~o'2o\.o"'''''

,0 A~o.

".'''/"'~/' , ,') '20\.0'<15 ,cBR> s,Y.

0,,"0.1'

'" ","'-

0'40-30-20_o

200~

~

2000~'"c""

'" '" ''0"';'0..",,<'- ~/VlCL 1500 1500~ 0'. "z !'UJ

CL

0 - roOf'•...UJ 1000 ;" '0 "';;'''' '""- •. 1000u I • '? R~ '30{.Z I ..,.,o~ Low5,c.a 0<t _~. A '-:' '6•... IVl I\II

~I 500L- - L - .A.i.../'" 500

PENETRATION IN IN£H PENETRATION IN IN<;J:iCJ>en

FIG.4.23b CBR FOR DIFfERENT SPECIMENS OF CRUSHED StONE (GRADATlON.Z)...•.;-~'

\,

--;;-- -'- -.:-.::.-~o.:;_ ----.:_-~~ ~ '7" ~-==.:.:q.l

,I ,/

2500 2500

0"0"3

PENETRATION IN INCHES1lIo

o0'40'30'2PENETRATION IN INCHES•

0'1o o

200Qt- 2000.

~-G'6~ -'tJ 0 )

~V\

~a.. (p;'1500 1500 0'~ ~oy1- ""Z 1w

'"""'f,a.. r c'OR",-sa1.~

0 -- - -- • ~ '2:>,•.... -- ---- e'--Ow 1000 -1'1 1000 ;: ~ R""""/'U c.BZ / I \\ A

''':- .Co. 8LO'fl!l1

~ I "c,' ",5 caR =- 491.~. 1'5 ~LO ,V\-V\W0::, 5001--- -1- ~ J:J../ 500

c'~. ,,

FIG.4,23c CBR FOR DIFFE RENT SPECI MENS OF CRUSHED STONE (GRADATION Z ) .'ClO"'4.

.~-

'.I '/

2500 2500

2000 2000

l/)

O;.T 1500zUJIl.

o0-

PENETRATION IN INCHESil>

0"4

5. cBR -=-, 4S'.

ceR -:.a s1.:A..-'::.--

0'3

\~eLO'''' , C6R- 34"/_...:.0 - 0 .

0"2

PENETRATION IN INCHES••0"'

500

1500

1000

0'40'3

.~c ",-oV<5,CeR= 4""7'.;;...--A- .••••••

15 BLOW". CBR = '371.

0'20'1

1000UJUZ<{0-l/)

lila::

FIG.4.2J,llC8R FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF COAL BURNT PiCKED JHAMA BRICK ,(GRADATION Zl

QIloQIIl

;;{ /~" .•. ' _-:'. """-

-.~~-- - - --- ---~~~---- ------"J".."--- ---~-~- -~ ----

--!

_J'

~ , ,->

2'500 2'500

2000

O'l,

10; BL.O""~' G",,'R.,,"31'/.

0-3

~

'" ceR:::.~ol.0..\...0'''' ---

~o ~",

~

9R" <3\'I.'/._

(.~~'7

0'20'1

Ii=-l--J~'

o o

'500

lOCO

1'500

0'4

\'5 51.-0'<'''''' <:-BR" 3'2.'/.

0'3

c.'3\'<. ~ '5~'/.~o e\..o'tle> ,

~ :;.0,'1' _C\?'- ~'/.

~~'.0,-°(c0

~O' I')

0.20-1

2000

U14 1'500-~•zW0-0••••. 1 1000wuz«t-~U1w

'5000::1

PENE1RA110N IN INCHES PENE1RA110N IN INCHES-FIG.4.24b CBR FOR DIFFEREN1 SPEC IMENS OF COAL BURN1 PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADAlION Z) ~

.£,~)II'..:,..".J.,:" ~. - ~

.~.,......,.,. ..

-_.....-.-."".-'-~ ~j;.'

'J -"

2500 2500

2000! 2000

0'1,

u

0'3

30 eLOWS , CEIR '" 47/...,- .~-

ce~--83'/.p~;;::---~-

0-20,10'1,0'30'2

~T 1500r-'" 0~ 1500

zw0..0 f"Y c6R ,,-'So'l.I-

w 1000 (/) 'O\-o'l'/~' ~ 1000uZ -----[ '~

<{ ~ , ~ - "l- I ,,0 - e-BR - ,:>7'/Vl 1.,..' '5 'BI.-OW5,

.1 _ C • \11lW0::' 50Q;

PENETRA TION IN INCHES••

PENETRATION IN INCHES•••

FIG,I,,24c CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF COAL BURNT PICKED JHAMA BRICK (GRADATION Zl• J,t f:""

, ,,;:--.--.,::,; \.I ./~

<Do

.<j1 , ,> > ,

2500 2500

2000 2000

0'40'30'2oo0'40'30'2oo

~t1500~

\?),I •.•. --1500

c"..~'. •••0

z c••••..".,.8'" c." ~wCL

O'll'!) •

0

<0'1 e\.

0-

W 1000 ru1000

_.,B'/,

Z+" 'l\~'

c.e"-

-< c.8R~.,<o'I, .J e'-o

0- - - - --;0

If)6\.0\'1 ~ •

-- - -

If)~o /:w "0.1 _ 2.'/.'1, ..~o/ caR ~2.9'1.

a:::~'

\~ -eLO'ri~• cuR ~ 0

500.,~ '8'-0"'& •

•.. _~- "'0 .~ 6 500\~

PENETRATION IN INCHES- PENETRATION IN INCHES••FIG.4.2Sa CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF FIRST CLASS BRICK (GRADATION Z

~~~

~ . 'j.

!

~.

j

,

2500 2500

2000 2000

ef'. - At)'/,A,Oe"'o"'''''c - 1000

0'40')

O'llS- C~R:,o'l

~'S llLO'llS, C»R~,1'1,

0'20'1o o

500

1500

0"4

\? e\..O'H~ lc.eR=~o'I.

0')

~

'"_ Co'Il_~ '" ",0

"..s' -'" •• 9>~"I:'

sf""O ,s 0

0'20"oo

1000

1500ZllJc..

~llJuZ«t-V>V>llJa::

V>c..

PENETRATION IN -INCHES-------------'~PENETRATION IN INCHES-

FIG,4,25b CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF FIRST CLASS BRICK (.GRADATION Z ) oQ•••••

,6--;l:~

-",~r

, >

2500 2500

0'40'30-20'40'30'20"oo

200or- 20001-_-79'\'0;<-c.eo~,I

__r"'- I 'Ol",.c..eR-

,-01500

•.•~\J'::I' _~ .••..,.." ",<' ~

ZW0-

0t-

W 10001000~ /u eeR-=3?'f.

Z« caR = ~r:.'I,

\,..o'fl':>'~o et-

"306L.O"M~1 4 ------ C1!~R= 28'/-Vl ~- ~\II

\~ _6\..O't4~)

W,.. , '

'?)'f 1'3 el.OW& J caR = '?.77.0:: 500 ••.• \wr Q d 500

FIG.4.25cCBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF FIRST CLASS BRICK (GRADATION, Z J

,><>

PENETRATION IN INCHES•PENETRATION IN INCHES••

'"••• ,-~~j

~. 1"

, >

2500 2500

2000 2000

PENETRATION IN INCHES"

0'1,

o.r .Co'e 'R = 3.we>.o~\..e:...-- _24 '{,

3~ ce~-o.-"' .. -\..0""\., '"

,,5 e\.-o"""" c.", ••.=-571.

0'3

PENETRATION IN INCHES

o

1500

1000

0'1,0'3

,0 6\.-oW5, G~R",,4'/'~\'5 B\.-oW~. c.BR =- 2'5"/'~_---<l

Bl<",,?<i/'",,~IC.

'0••••0(p"

0"20-1oo

Ulc...~ I 1500.zwc...

0•....w 11000uz<!•....UlVlW0:, 500

.'1:"j:

FIG.t; •.26a CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF THIRD CLASS BRICK (GRADATION Z)

•

oD

'" ,',::;r

;!,...,

'",~[cf~

, ,

2500 2S00

2000 2000

O'~0'300

VI1S00..T 1S001-~.

zw~

1000L

f>- s"'/'c.BR -;:.55/.0 ",~.Ge -t- e •.OW~' - e\.O",5 (,,">W 1000 "u '!> j.Z ,,0 . GB~=: 37/. I V f>-~4'I,<l: .•... eI-0",5. ,?,,' , 1-0""~'Cea. -t- 0'1. '3° '" :30 eoVIVI

\'3 51-OW". caR" 23/.w - ----sOar0:: sao o ~ }'I .~ 51-OWe>. GeR." 21'/.

'5.J" 0

FIG.';~26~ CaR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF THIRD CLASS BRICK (GRADATION Z

PENETRATION IN INCHES PENETRATION IN INCHESlIo- ..,

'"-i- •... ,':-

-~:-~"'

-~~;0;;;,

._- ._~:_ -;~~--:- -,.o~,-_-_. - 'j

- •

2500 2500

2000 2000

Vl11. 150 1500~

I I0'3 O'~

'''' 6J..OW';' Ce>R='2.'2.'/.-cr-

6,-0'1'15' C6R" 31- 'f.3°

e,-o'l<';'c eR" ",'/.'1.

",S ~ 'f.

0'20'1

1000

O'~0'3

30 e\..O'//S" c.6R =. 33"/ .~=2.""I.

.~r_ C.BR=.53'/'c:a.\..O" ':J' '

[0<' u

0'2

500

oo

100wuZ<•....VlVlW0:

zW11.

o•....

PENETRATION IN IN CHES•••PENETRATION IN INCHES•

..,;;-~-

FIG.4.26e'CBR FOR DIFFERENT SPECIMENS OF THIRD CLASS. BRICK (GRADATION Z)oj)

'" :r."_.__::'"-:---_.. -'-. r]

.=-.-~--- J

120 120,

1201151101051S 515011,511,0

100t- I rooT

t=zwuct:

~BOI- I I 80

I 1-- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - --Ict:CDu

BI 60, / I 60::.:::.q:0VlI ~J/ I

II ~o

DRY DENSI1Y AS MOL DED, PCF.

( A)

DRY DENSI1Y AS MOLDED, PCF_

(B)

:.:,.' .~{:..~.-"

FIG.4.27 CBR DENSI1Y RELATION: (Al CRUSHED STONE (8) COAL BURNT

E ~ R ~

PICKED JHAMA\P-.t

1,,

~;~~:]-,~;-~

100 100

eoBO

t-

Z~, GOr- --- -----)1 GO~ , IW~ I

I

;1 II

1,0 I 1,0

0I

w I::<: I<f , I0 IVl

20 I 20III

105 110 115 120 105 110 115 120

DRY DENSITY AS MOLDED,PCF ••( A)

DRY DENSITY AS MOLDED,PCF ••

( B)

I,'"/"

FIG.I".28C8R DENSITY RELATIONSHIP: (A) FIRST CLASS BRICK (8) THIRD CLASS BRICK0.000

1-~--J'

J:~,•

99

4.5 CBR at Uifferent Compactive Efforts

CBR molds were compacted at different compactive

efforts and soaked CBR values were determined. The mixtures

were taken in gradation Z for gas burnt picked jhama brick

aggregates and crushed stone. The values obtained are com-

pared in Table 4.6 and graphs of the. average CBR.'values are

shown in fig. 4.29.

Table 4.6 CBR-Compactive Effort Relation

Compactive CBR-value in perc eriteffortapplied in Gas burnt Cru shed stoneft-lb/cft pick ed ihama

56,000 156.0 169.0(Modi fied AASHO)

12,320 97.0 94.0(Standard AA SHO)

14,300 115.5 110.0

6,600 59.5 61.5

3,300 45.6 52.6

4.6 Decrease in Volume Aftar Compaction

for the mixture in gradation Z the volume of loose

mixture and the volu~e after compaction.was measured for

different specimens. The average decrease in volume after

compaction was 20 to 22 percent.

. '. -

• \. •• 1•••.

\:-~~.;~~

,

.'1./

,-",'

2500

)'-)

2500

Gradation= Z20001 .~~~

2000

I 7~}:i .'~"

1500F-~ ----- =I;! c,o({l<;l.

~~1500f---- --/

Sy..\)1'1'

~~o -lJJ

c,\<>~ c,'CIR-CL

0>--

lJJ -- -1-u 1000 1000z I I<{ I I>-- I I IVl I I- j I IVl

I IIJJ I I I I I0::

500 I II 500 I III I I II I I 1I I, I

I ,I I I I I

I I I I I I I 0 I I I0.1 0) 0) 0.'. 0 0,1 0) 0,3 0.'.

PENETRATION IN INCHES - PENETRATION IN INCHES •

.>~). j

j~..

FIG.429 CBR AT DIFFERENT COMPACTIVE EFFORTS

..I. .<

oo

,:i...?

101


Plasticity characteristics of the soil binder in the

~ixture was determined. The liquid limit and plastic limit

tests were performed in accordance with A5TM/AN5l D423-66

(Reapproved in 1972) and ASTM/ANSl 424-59 (Reapproved in

1971) respectively. The material passing No. 40 sieve was

taken from the mixture for these determinations. Results

are shown in Appendix-C (Table C-12).

A hydrometer analysis of the fina portion of the

mixture was done eccording to the procedure described by

LAMB£(16). The result~ of this analysis is shown in Table 4.7

and in Table C-ll in Appendix-C.

Table 4.7 Results of Hydrometer Analysis of the Finesof the Mixture

D in m.m. 0.0699 0.052 0.037 0.0~4 0.019 0.014 0.01 0.00712

!!ii

r,I

t

Percentfiner 33.66 24.0 16.27 11.52 6.72 5.76 4.8

o

4~r~.. -:~_.

CHAPTER-5

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSIONS OF TEST RESULTS

5.1 Appropriate Materials

For a dense mixture, the general requirements for

coarse and fin e aggr'egates ere that, •aggregates should

be hard, tough, durable and free frQm excess amount of flat

end elongeted pieces and vegetable particles or other organic

compounds'. From the results of the tests of coarse and fine

eggregates summarised in Table 3.2 and 3.3 it can be said

that the crushed brick aggregetes satiafy the general criteria

of the aggregates.

The quality of coarse aggregate is controlled by

specifying that the percentage of wear by Los Angeles

Abrasion test should not exceed 50 percent (According to

AA5HO) and 34 percent (according to BRRL) for high type

bituminoue pavement construction. Table 3.2 reveals that

all types of bricks for the study satisfy the requirements

of AASHTO but only gas burnt picked jhama bricks satisfy

ths requirement of BRRL. Tha percentage of wear for coal

burnt bricks slightly exceeds the BRRL limit.

5.2 Gradation

were selected with a view to obtaining the densest mixture

giving maximum stability. Gas burnt picked jhama aggregates

103

and sand-soil mixtures were used for obtaining these greda-

tions. The maximum dry density and the CBR values for these

mixtures are summarized in Table 4,3. The CBR curves for

all these gradations are presented in Figs, 4,11 to 4,16.

These curves are similar in nature indicating increasing

resistances for higher values of pe~etrations. But the

moisture density graphs shown in Figs. 4.8 to 4.10 are not

identical in shape and varies according to the finenesses

of the mixtures. Hie finer mixture gives sharper curve and

coaraer mixture have flater ones. The CBR values at 100

percent maximum AASHO density varies from 65.0 percent for

gradation X5 to 97.0 percent for gradation Z. A close study

of these results reveals that the CBR values increase es

the densities of the mixture increases and at maximum density V'there is maximum CBR value. rhe maximum CBR value is obtained

for gradation Z shown in the last column of Table 4,2.

The other requirements for, gradation by AASHO and TRRL

as discussed in Chapter 2 are that:

1) the fraction passing No. 200 sieve shall not be

greater than two thirds of the amount passing

No. 40 sieve;

ii) not less than lU percent should be retained between

each pair of successive sieves except for the top

two largast sieves,

The gradation I Z' satisfies all the above requirements.

104

5.3 Combination of Aggregates to Produce Gradation 'Z'

In most cases no suitable single aggregate may be

available to meet the requirements of gradation Z. In such

cases aggregates from diffarent sources may have to be

blended to meet the requirements of the specifications as

in gradation Z. The blending should be such that the compoei-

tion of the mixture which is to be designed must be within

the limits of the gradation.

The specified gradation Z employs 66.0 percent coarse

aggregates. 24.0 percent fine aggregates and lU.O percent

fines in the aggregate mixture. The author made an additional

study regarding the gradation of the hand crushed brick

aggregate sources in Bangladesh. The study is contained

in Appendix-B. It is found in the study that the crushed

brick aggregate obtained when the labours were assigned

to crush t inch downgrade is the suitable source to supply

most of the coarse aggregates anq some portion of the fine

a9gregates in gradation Z. To obtain the rest of the fine

aggregates and the fines of the mixture. a medium to coarse

sand and some soil were mixed with crushed bricK aggregatea.

The sand mey be c~assified as well graded (5W) according

to unified soil classification system. The value of the

uniformity coefficient C is 8.46 and that of gradationu

coefficient Cg is 2.34. The fineness modulus of the sand

is 2.80. The soil used in the blending is silty and plasticity

index is less than 6. The grain size distributione of the

II-I~I.I

105

components of the mixture are shown in Fig, B-1, The band

It is seen from the table that 70 percen. crushed

blending of crushed brick, sand and soil is found out,

Fig, B-2 which also shows the position of the blended

a job mix formula for theIn the Table 5,1

mixture within the band,

of the grain size distribution of gradation Z is shown in

brick aggregates. 20 percent of medium sand and 10 percent

crushed bricK aggregates, 20 percent of medium sand and

10 percent of silty soil are mixed, The combined aggregate

in the above percentage proportions falls within the

grading band of Gradation Z. In most sieve the value of

the percent finer. is very near to the mid point bf limits

of gradation Z, Hence the above percentages of the respectiva

aggregates may serve as a job mix formula to produce crushed

brick aggregate-sand~soil mixture in gradation Z,

5,4 Moisture Content

The moisture content-dry density relationships for six

mixtures shown in Figs, 4,B to 4,10 indicate that the density

increases with an increase in the moisture content, After

a certain percentage of moisture in the mixture, the dry-

density decreases with the increase of moisture, The moieture

contents for maximum densities for these mixtures varies

from 12,50 percent to 13,50 percent shown in Table 4,2.

'.-~

•

\

,, '/

Table 5.1 Job Mix Formula for Gradation Z.

Percent Passing

Contribu- Total Contribu- Total Contribu-tion in the tion in the tion in themix, 70% mix,20% mix, 10%

Sievesize

ttl max. sizecrushed brickaggregateTotal

MediumsandF,M=2,8o

Silty soil Combi-nedgrading

Midpoint

ofZ

Limi t5

ofZ,

.~\t;

..,~~

It" 100 70 100 20 100 10 100 97.5 95-100

i" " 70 19.0 100 20 100 10 79 80,0 70-90

t" n 22.4 100 20 100 10 52.4 59.0 50-68.No. 4 20 14.0 100 20 100 10 44,0 44.0 38-50

,

No. 8 13.5 4,55 30 6,0 ' 97 9,7 20,0 18.5 15-22

No, 200 1.5 1.05 3 0.60 87 8.7 10,35 10.0 8-12

•...o0\

/

107

For brick aggregates, it is said in artic~e 5.2 that

maximum CBR values are obtained at maximum dry densities

and the maximum dry density is obtained at optimum moisture

content. In other words it can be said that the maximum

CBR value is obtained when the mixture is compacted at

optimum moisture content. From the test results it is seen

that for gradation Z. the mixture with which maximum CBR

value is obtained has an optimum moisture content of 13.0

percent of the dry weight of the mixture. The maximum dry

density for this mixture at this moisture content is

119.0 lbs/cft.

5.5 Percent Fines

Like moisture content the amount of fines applied in

the eggregate-sand-~oil mixture controls the density of the

mixture and also the stability. An optimum amount of fines

which is just sufficient to fill most of the voids in

aggregate combination gives the maximum stability. For gas

burnt picked j hama brick-sand-soil mixtures, the CBR tests

were done by vsrying ths percentages of fines. Results are

shown in Fig. 4.21. The soaked CRR values for different

amount of fines are shown in Table 4.4.

It is seen in Fig. 4.21 that the maximum dry density

occurs' at 12.5 percent of fines whereas the maximum CBR

value is obtained at about 10 percent of fines. The maximum

", •.• '~

lOB

dry density at Dptimum mDisture CDntent and 10 percent finee

was 119.0 Ibs/cft fDr gradatiDn Z. But when the percent Df

fines was increased tD 12.5 percent the density increased

tD 121.5 Ibs/cft and the CSR value decreased by 2 percent.

Thus it can be seen that fines in excess Df Dptimum may

SDmetimes increase the density but aecreases the stability

Df the mixture.

5.6 CompactiDn

The density as well as the stability Df the mixture

is very much dependent Dn the cDmpactive effDrts applied

during compactiDn. The cDmpactive efforts applied by

standard AA5HO compactiDn method is 12,320 ft-lb/cft. The

loose mixture in gradation Z was compacted applying this

amount of effort. The volume of the loose mixture was

decreased by about 20 to 22 percent after compactiDn. The

density of the mixture increasea from 105.0 Ibs/cft to

119.0 Ibs/cft. From the compactive effDrt - CBR relationship

shawn in Table 4.6 it is seen that for gas burnt picked

jhame brick the CBR value at modified AA5HU compaction is

about 1.6 times the eBR at standard AA5HU compaction. The

compactive effort applied in modified AA5HO is 4.5 times

the standard AA5HO effort.

Crushed stone aggregates were alsO studied to have a

cDmparison with brick aggregates. Sand, silt and clay

fractiDns of sail were blended with hand crushed stone

••••• r"" .~

',,' C'-'!!-

109

aggregates in gradation l. The CBrt values were then deter-

mined following standard AASHU procedure. It is found in

Table 4.6 that at modified AASHU compaction the CBR value

is about 1.B times the CaR value at standard AASHO compaction.

From the results it is also observed that at lower compactive

efforts the crushed stone aggregate'mixture has comparatively

higher CBR values than brick aggregate mixture.

5.7 CaR fot Different Types of Aggregates

Four types of brick and stone aggregates were taken

for the comparative study. All the mixtures compacted were

in gradation Z. The physical properties 0 f these aggregate

types are shown in Tables 3.2 and 3.3. The maximum dry

density. CBR values for these materials are shown in

Table 4.5. A study of these fables indicates that the

higher the crushing strength, the higher is the CBR value.

For the crushed stone used CBR v~lue of 94 percent is

attained for gradation l. Among the four types of bricks.

the gas burnt picked jhama brick aggregate gives the maximum

CBR value, maximum dry density and minimum optimum moisture

content. The bricks classified here as third cless are

the under burnt low quality bricks collected from different

kilns. The average crushing strength of these bricks is

1375 psi and this aggregate gives the minimum CUR value of

42.0 percent at lUD percent standard AASHO density.

110


With crushed brick or stone aggregates some sand and

soil were mixed to satisfy the designed gradation, Normally

the fines produced during hand crushing of bricks or stones

are nonplastic. The amount thus obtained is very small in

quantity. To have specified percentage of fines in the

mixture silt and clay fracfion of soil (material passing

No, 200 sieve) is used in the mixture. The combined mixture

may sometimes be plastic (PI greater than 6) if there is

excess clay particles, Hence plasticity tests were performed

according to standard procedure with the portion of the

mixture passing No, 40 sieve.

The plasticity tests described 1n article 4.6 shows

that the material used in this investigation fulfil the

requirements.

III

CHAPTER -6CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIUNS

6.1 Conclusions

The conclusions derived from the test results of the

present study may be classified into two major groups

depending upon

A) the properties of different types of aggregates used

in the mixtures and

8) the behaviour of the mixture with a particular type

of aggregate.

A. Conclusions based on the properties of different types

of aggregates.

The search for appropriate material was done with

different types of bricks viz gas burnt picked jhama, first

class and third class bricks. Fo~ comparison, crushad stone

mixtures were also studied, The search reveals thst :

i) Crushed.brick aggregates satisfy the general

criteria of aggrega.tes for base and subbase

constructions.

ii) The gas burnt picked jhama brick aggregate is the

most satisfactory among all the bricks, considering

the wearsbility of the aggregates.

112

iii) Among four types of brick aggregate mixtures,

tha gas.burnt picked jhama brick aggregate mixture

has tha maximum density and minimum optimum moistura

content. When compacted in the standard AASHO

procedure the maximum drydensity is l19.q pounds.per cubic feet and the optimum moisture contant

is 13.0 percant. The mixture was compacted as in

grada~ioh Z shown in fable 6.1.

iv) Using suitable gradation, the CBH value of the

mixture is the most important characteristic for

the base or subbase constructions. The capacity

in terms of CSR value waS the highest for gas burnt

picked jhama brick aggregate mixture. The CBR value

at 100 percent standard AASHO compaction is found

to be 97.0 percant when the aggregates and soil

were mixed in gradation Z. TheCBR values for

other types of brick aggiegate mixtures were as

follows:

._-¥}

for coal burnt brick aggregate mixture: 74.U percent

for first class brick

for third class brick"

"

"

"

62.5 parcent

42.0 percent.

Although the CSR value for crushed stone aggregates

should be 100 percent, but in gradation Z, a CSR value of

only 94.0 percent is attained.

113

For base course constructions gas burnt brick

aggregate mixtures can be used satisfactorily.

For subbase course constructions, any type of the

brick aggregates can be used.

,B, Conclusions based on the behaviour of the mixture

with a particular type of aggregate mixture,

i) Gradation of the aggregate mixture is an important

factor determining the load carrying capacity of

base or subbase courses,

The gradation of the crushed brick sand and soil

mixture shown below in Table 6,1 gives the maximum CBR

valua and is suggested to be used in base or subbase

courseSe

Table 6,1 Gradation Z

Sieve size Percent Finer

" 2 inch ..:t~.

It inch 95-100

t inch 70-90

1- inch 50-6B,O

No, 4 3B,U-50

No, B 28,0-40

No, 30 15-22,0

No, 200 B,O-12,O

0,--~-----"''',~~-....-,J',

,~:'<~,r

114

ii) The fines used in the mixture increase or

decrease the CBR value depending on their percentage

in the mixtures. At optimum percent fines the CBR

value is the maximum. For gradation Z, the optimum

percent fines (combined silt and clay) is 10.0

percent.

iii) The optimum moisture content at which maximum

CDR value is attained in the mixture varies with

the type 0 f the aggregates, gradation of the

mixtures and the percent fines in the mixtu~e.

For gas burnt picked jhama brick aggregates with .•

ten percent fines, the optimum moisture content

is 13.0 percent and the maximum dry density is

119.0 pounds per cubic foot at 100 percent

standard AASHo compaction.

iv) The CBR value is depndent on the compactive efforts

applied. For crushed ga's burnt picked j hama brick

aggregate mixture, the CBR value at 100 percent

standard AASHo compaction is 97.0 percent and at

100 percent modified AASHo compaction, the CBR

value is 156.0 percent.

6.2 Recommen~ations

6.2.1 Recommendations for the Future Study

i) In the present study six gradations were used

for investigati6n; More gradations could be taken

.rl"'- ..•..:~ "

\j

115

to find theCBR values. In the future more

close iovestigation shuuld be takeo to find a

suitable gradation at which maximum CBR value

would be attained.

ii) In the present study the CBIi values of al-l

mixtures were determined in the laboratory. The

same materials should be compacted in the field

at the same deosities and field CGR values should

be determined. Correlations should be developed

between laboratory and field CGR values.

6.2.2 Recommendations for Field Constructions

i) For the construction 0 f base courses for high

type pavements, gas burnt picked jhama bricks

are recommended to be used.

ii) The mixture is to be blenped as 1n gradation

l (Table 6.1) found in the study.

iii) Duriog constructioo in the field, the gradation

of the mixture should be maintained.

iv) The optimum moisture content should be present in

the mixtu"re during compaction. For thorough dis-

tribution of moisture water should be added

several hours in advance of compection.

,

116

REFERENCES

1. Special Report No. 113, High"ay Research Board, "StandardNomenclature and Definition for Pavement Components andDeficiencies" Washington D.C. (1970).

2 Peattie, K.R., "Stress and ~train Factors for Three LayerElastic ~ystem", Highway Research Board Bulletin 342, 1962.

3.

4.

Neilson, J.p., "Rational Pavement f..valuation - Review ofPresent Technology" Air Force .eapons Laboratory TechnicalReport, ~ew Mexico 1969.

Deklotz, I.A., "Effect of Varying the Quantity and qualityof the Soil Portion of Highway Aggregates on Their Stability"Proceedings, Highway Research Board 1940.

QI,

5. Yoder, E.J. and Woods, K.B., "Compaction and StrengthCharacteristics of Soil Aggregate Mixtures" Proceedings,Highway Research Board 1946.

6. Makdisi-Ilyas, Faiz, "The Effect of Plasticity and Quantityof Fines on Stability of Soil-Gravel Mixes", Joint HighwayResearch Project 16, 1972.

7. Faiz, A., "The Effect of Skipgrading on stability of SoilAggregate Mixtures" Joint H1ghway Research Project Report 10,1971.

8. Mainfort,R.C. and Lawton, W.L, "Laboratory Compaction Testsof Course-Graded Pav~ng and Embankment Materials" HighwayResearch Board Proceedings 1953.

9. Drake, ,~.IJ., "Combination of Waterbound-Macadam and Dense-Graded Aggregate Base for Flexible Pavements", HighwayResearch Board, Proceedings, 1953.

10. Cedergren, H.R., "Is- Field CBR test Adaptable to GranularSubgrades and Bases 1" Civil Engineering Journal. 1948.

(""1'.\T'~';

.~'-

117

11. American Association for State Highway and Transportation

Officials, "Standard Specifications for Highway Materials

and ~1ethod. of Samplina and Te'Oting" 1966.

12. U.S. Aqency for International Developments, "(;uide Lines

for Standard Speci fications fo r Highways and Bridges"

washington, D.C. 1975.

13. California Division of Highways, "'otandard Specification"

1960.

14. Road Research Laboratory, "A Guide to the Structural

Design of Pavements for New Roads", Department of Environment,

Road Note No. 29, London, 1'170.

15. Ministry of Transport, "Specification for Road and Bridge

W0 r k s", Lon don, HN50 1963.

16. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, "A Guide to the

Structural Design 0 f Bitumen-surfaced Roads in Tropical

and Subtropical Countries", Road Note No. 31, London

HMSO 1977.

17. Hodgkinson, W.G•• "A Guide for the ::itructural Design of

Bituminou s Surfaced Pavements" .Bangladesh Road Research

Laboratory, Oacca 197B.

lB. Lambe, W.T. (195B) "Soil Tebting for EnGineers", Jhon

Wiley and Sons, Inc. London.

19. ASn~, "Annual Book of ASH1 Standards" Part 14, Concrete

and Mineral Aggregates, ASTM, USA 1979.

20. Yoder and Witczak, "Principles of Pavement Design"

2nd Edition wiley Interscience 1977.

21. Ashworth, R., "Highway Engineering" Heinemann Education

Books Ltd., .London .1969.

"

o:'(..." ".C."a.

APPENUIX-AAVAILABILITY OF MATERIALS

. :-'.' ~ ... ' .-..ilr

119

APPENDIX-A

Availability of Materials Used in the Study for Base and

Sub-base Constructions.

The materials used to blend together for getting the

desired gredetions are:

i) Bricksii) Stones

iii) Sandiv~ Silt and cley fraction from soil.

i) Bricks: Bricks are most widely used artificial

building stone in Bangladesh. Bricks can be prepared any

where in Bangladesh. The qualities, of which strength and

durability are important are functions of constituent

materials and burning process. Day by day coal burning

process is becoming obsolete where gas is available.

Fortunately Bangladesh has an abu.ndant storage 0 f natural

gas which are being supplied to almost all parts of Bangladesh

at a cheaper rate. Use of gas as the fuel in Brick kilns

is undoutedly more economic and efficient than any other

burning method.

Where gas is not av~ilable, only. there, coal or oil

can be used. for burning bricks. This study re;'eals that

the gas burnt picked jhama bricks and jhama bricks ere

the most suitable type of bricks for base ans subbase cons-

truction. Oth~r types of bricks wer~ also used for comparison.

120

These types are classified by Bangladesh Public Works

Department (P.w.D.l.

1. Picked Jhama Bricks: These bricks are uniformly

varified throughout, but must be of good shape, heavy

and of selected quality. They must not be spongy. ,

2. Jhama Bricks: These are slightly over burnt bricks

but not quite so well shaped as picked jhama bricks. They

must not be spongy and must be free from cinders and projec-

ting lumps and of fairly good shape.

3. First class Bricks: They should be of uniform size

and colour, thoroughly and evenly burnt. They should ring

clearly when struck with a hammer or anohter brick. They

should be well shaped with even surfaces and without cracks,

rainspots or flaws of any kind. They should not absorb

watar more than one sixth of their weight when wet in water

for 24 hours.

4. Second class Bricks: these bricks must posses the

hardness and colour of first class bricks but are slightly

irregular in shape, size or rough on the surface.

5. Third Class Bricks: These are bricks which are

not sufficiently burnt to the class as first or second but

which are burnt sufficiently and of uniform shape and size

for use in unimportant works.

On the basis of fuel two varities of picked jhama

and jhama bricks were used - gas burnt and coal burnt.

C':.' '~.X~"

121

Actually for the construction of pavements the bricks are

evaluated by their crushing strength values and percent

wear in Los Angeles Abrasion machine. In Chapter J a

comparison is given for differen" types of bricks used

in this study. Now these bricks can be prepared at places

near job sites and after crushing br~ck aggregates can be

obtained.

ii) Stone, Boulders can be crushed to the desired

sizes to have crushed stone aggregates. The smaller sized

stones - shingles and pea~gravels can also be mixed ta

have the aggregate mixture. The general name af these

natural aggregates is gra~el and includes Granite, Trap,

Basalt, Sandstone, Limestone, Argillaceous Limestone

(Kankar), Dolomite, Laterite, Quartzite, Slates and Marbles.

In Bengladesh most of the big quarries for the collec-

tian of stones are in Sylhet District. Bhalagonj, Jafflong,

Shella and Bhowal qua~ries are i~portant for the callection

of Boulders and Shing~es. Small quantities of stones are

also available at Shita Kundu, Rangamati, Cox's Bazar of

Chittagong district and in the beds of Mohadea and other

river coming from Garo Hills in Mymensingh. Stones are

also available in some places of the northern districts

like Rangpur and Dinajpur.

r

I

iii) Sand: Some sand is required to be blended with

soil and aggregate to meat the standard gradations. The

01--~

122

fineness of sand which is to be used depends on the propor-

tions in the aggregete mixture and the type of the soil

employed in the mixture. The send may be from coarse to

fine according to grain size. It can be obtained from

river bed or from pits..

Sand is abundantly available allover Bengladesh.

Very good variety of river sand is available in the districts

of Dacca, Mym~nsingh and Sylhet. Both sea sand and river

sand of good quality are found in the coastal districts.

Sands are also available in the northern districts of

Bangladesh but not of good quality.

ivl Soil (for silt and clay fractions): Some minimum

amount of silt and clay fraction of soil (material passing

No. 200 mesh sieve) is required in the mixturs. Normally

bed soil, efter drying and pulverizin~, can be mixad with

aggregates. But if thara i.s excess amount of clay fractiona

in the soil, lumps, clay balls may be formed during mixing

which deteriorates the quality of the mixture. In such

cases, suitable soil from adjacent areas can be used.

r

APPENDIX-BHAND CRUSHING OF BRICKS AND BOULUERS

123

APPENDIX-BHand Crushing Df Bricks and BDulders

This appendix pertains tD the cDnstructiDn Df any

structure where crushed aggregates are used. The naturally

Dccuring shingles and paa-gravels are rDundshaped with

pDlished surfaces. The strength Df these smaller sized

aggregates are less than that frDm large sized stDnes named

as bDulders. TD ensure prDper interlDcking and increased

surface rDughness, bDulders are crushed tD smaller sized

aggregates. Bricks are nDrmally crushed tD smaller sized

angular rDugh surfaced aggregates fDr use in cDnstructiDn

work.

Thee crushing Df bricks Dr bDulders can be' dDne manually

by a hammer Dr by using machines. It is an accepted fact

that machine crushing prDduces unifDrmly graded aggregates.

FDr CDncrete wDrks and fDr the cDnstructiDn Df dense greded

pavement cDmpDnents ~ell graded aggregates are required.

By hand crushing Df bricks Dr bDulders a well graded Dr

clDse tD well graded aggregate is expected tD be Dbtained.

Bangladesh ia a pDpulous pDDr cDuntry. The economy

prevail~ng nDw in this cDuntry desires tD undartake labDur

intensive methDds rather than capital intensive methods

fDr cDnstructiDn wDrks. TherefDre in mDst Df the cDnstruction

wDrks, bricks Dr bDulders are crushed manually tD get graded

crushed aggregates.

124

The author used crushed bricks and boulders for this

study. fo meet the standard gr~dation it was found that

some aggregate of particular sizes are to be blended with,

and some aggregate are to be discaraad from the mixture

of aggregates obt'ained from hand crushed source,!. In this

connection additional informations were collected regarding

the gradation of typical hand crushing which is most common

in this country. The information are obtained in the following

forms:

i) Comparison of gradations for crushed bouldars

and crushed bricks (Picked jhama).

ii) Typical gradations for crushed bricks (picked jhama) Pt:".

under the following circumstances: Labours were

recruited at random of different eges and sex.

A group of labours were directed to crush bricks

into 1" maximum size. The crushed materials were

collected and gradations for different labours

of a particular group were found out. Average

values of thesa gradations of that particular

group was taken. Similarly gradations for other

maximum sizes were also obtained.

iii) Typical gradations for crushed bricks of a

particular maximum sizes by labours of different

ages and sex.

125

Table B-1 Comparison of Gradations for Crushed Bouldereand Crushed Bricks (Picked Jhama)

5i ev ePercent Finer .i~~..

size Avg. gradation for Avg. gradation for cru shedcru shed stone b ro ken bricks broken by typicalby t ypical labou rs labours

Max. si ze 1" Max. size" 1"

It" 100 100

1" 79.5 92.59

1-" 47.0 64.6B

t" 26.0 41.47

i" 16.75 15.20

t" 9.'50 1'315.07 i~'','

No. 4 6.34 2.71 .~h

No. B 3.00 0.55

No. 16 1.B5 0.36

No. 30 1.15 0.20

No. 50 0;50 0.05

No. 100 0.20 0.02

No. 200 0.05 0.01

Itis seen from the above comparison that stones after

crushing remains more oversized than bricKs. It can also be

said that crushed bricks are more well graded than the stones.

For brick~ therefore hand crushing is more suitable than for

stones.

126

Table 8-2 Typical Gradations for Different Maximum Sizes(Crushed Picked Jhama Bricks)

Percent finerSieve s~ze ln tn tn

It'' 100 100 lUO.1" 92.6 94.0 96.0

tn 64.65 71.75 69.60

t" 41.45 39.30 39.95

in 15.20 27.35 31.95

t" 5.10 16.65 23.40err

No. 4 2.70 13.00 19.95 '4:0~.' '?,,?~"f>'

No. B 0.55 7.20 13.40 "

No. 16 0.35 4.40 9.60

No. 30 0.20 2.45 6.20

No. 50 0.05 1.45 4. ro

No. lUO ,0.02 0.50 2.50 "f';'"

No. 200 0.01 0.10 1.,10

It is seen from the above table that more over sized

materials are obtained for lower sizes and lower sized

materials after crushing are more well graded."Ie

.,.

127

Table B-3 Typical ~radations of Crushed Bricks (t" max. size)Broken by Labours of Different Ages and Sex.

(Crushed Picked Jhama Bricks)

SievePercent Finer

size Male Female

Gr. 1 Gr. 2 Gr. 3 Gr. 1 Gr. 2 Gr. 3

1" 87.00 96.0 91.20 71.1e 85.80 77•80

tn 66.35 69.6 67.55 27.82 57.20 49.85 {j)

tn 41.65 39.9 41.85 12.42 30.40 27. 50

t" 32.65 31.9 31.00 6.58 21.90 •19.65

t" 19.20 23.5 19.80 4.16 14.75 11.40

No. 4 15.35 19.95 15.75 2.52 11.75 6.65

No. 8 8.65 13.40 8.45 2.10 7.45 4.75

No. 16 4.40 9.60 4.90 1.98 4.90 2.95

No. 30 0.85 6.15 2.95 1.74 3.25 2.00

No. 50 0.40 4.16 1.75 1.44 0.60 1.45 • f

No. 100 0.15 2.50 1.00 0.82 0.35 0.90 ~

No. 200 0.00 1.10 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.45

Gr.'1: Age between 12-20 yrs.

Gr. 2: Age between 25-35 yrs.

Gr. 3: Age above 50 yrs.

From Table B-3 it reveals th",t the quality of cru shing is

better by group 2 labours for both male and female. Also this

group having age between 25-35 years crush more well graded

materials.

,.}


•....oI-

•....zwucrW<L

-'20 <l:

10

30

\:;l70 ~

VlVl60 <l:0..

'0

50

o1\'2" 2' 2\/23"~' -3/8' )~. 3/( ,"

SIEVES

~

- ,

,~

108

U. S. STANDARD

STANDARD SIEVE S1'" 'I

318" 112" )ii: 1" ,112 2 2'R 3" ";00I '1-7-!

_______ • _. 1- _.•_, __ - ••

70( )'Y' 7 2 5 2 3 ~o10

30'--1 - -' -~--:_--' -~ - __ '_L.sQl):d_~I__ t" . I "~0r= ---,--'-'--:-- ----..-----,--r -----r--, t- -'L-'-"-- , .

______ ._. , _', 'I - --1---- ---;- lL2..;MClx..5.t

501 ' . __ ' : : ~ ,Brlck. .._~QQS.1

t ~-,--~=:-~~t--.,-f , "• • . t '70 :----- -- --.- --- .- -I -- -.--, -----: _,__ '_, I I

1 • I .:

80, ---r-, , ,-'--'L __ •._-J :;.

, I I : I901-7 CLJ-_-J-_I ! ~--i--I I ! i • I I .

_I _

10080 50 ~o 30 20 )6)00

200

-J<l:I-

oI-

0---ZWucrW0..

<l:•....wcr

zo 20w

,l.JFIG. B-1 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF THE COMPONENT AGGREGATES OF

GRADATION 'z.NCIo

• __ w ,_ -

d ,-: .,


90.

. "L. __lU()

" 'J2\23'111) I

._-_. ------'

" ! I'318 112 j,L.

1---

-------- ~----- - -- •..

B. S. STMWARD SIEVE S

1')072 S2 jL 18 14 7 j115"! I I! ' ! \ '! 1;-t-.-j-----i--L--.-L.--'-J- i -"----I--. _L_

j ;_~ __ ~L_L~~-L_~_~--L--~---.~__-:!L_

__~t. L --\- _I -.--0-- ---+--

- . -0- , ~ -.- __

0200u

10

20I_~_~__ ~.~.~_ .. _. __._. _ ,. .- -.--~-.--::-:=1S 0

301' --- •__.. ~--.13..<l:~d-.2.~..iir<:l<J.aJ..!.O!1....Z_ -- - -------17(, ~, -Lo~I--~-~-::::::-=-:..--:=:-:-:--.. . .-----.L. --- --'-~'---==l5( ~L-~.-. ; . .Comblned G,radlngl, -- -----1 . 0'v,I ~. ~~o..L.llie ..-Blendgd .. --.. _- ''0:

oU • Mi'>:tu re '=76:b--.~---~i-.~-~-;~-=:~-.----.:-' ~-::~80 r _ir--T~;-~~_~~.==;:~_--~~~.-__-~--.~=~-.~=--=~:~_-:::-j2 [; ~

. I . . ., .. 090 __==+ ' __-i__ i ! .!_L__. • .--- -----,---.-: . 10 ,....: : 1 i : l' , I ,

II,' -----r---~~.-- ~__-1-_

100 I I I Iii ii' , : 10200 10080 SO 1,0302015 108 1, 3is'1!i 31('" ,i;'i'i21/2'3"L'

<J:,....o,....

z

--'

u0:::W0..

wcr

wz<J:

U.S.STANDARD SiEVES

, .FIG. B"2 GRADATION BAND OF GRADATION Z AND GRADATION OF THE

BLENDED MIXTURE

NID

~,:j'-"

".,

-je

APPENllIX-CTABLES OF TEST RESULTS

AND

FIGURES OF TEST EQUIPMENTS

'"

,

Table C-l CBR Test Results for Gas Burnt Picked Jhama Brick; Gradation Xl

Compactive Spn. Penetration load in psi required for penetrations Dry Avg. Correc- Avg.effort, No. in inches density dry ted CBReor.1b-ft/cft 0.02 0.04 0.06 O.OB 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 Ibslcft density in 10 CBR

1bsic ft in :;;1 103 ~~7 470 652 635 1100 1252 1525 1712 11B.8 90"-~,

14,300 2 115 3u5 d95 673 855 1115 1300 1602 1BOO 11~'.1 32(65 blm,s 3 113 320 525 736 900 1192 1395 1720 1980 121.9 119.3 95 91.Bper layer) 4 115 318 523 715 906 1209 1402 1660 1413 121,3 97

5 103 27- 450 648 810 1105 1250 1460 1642 117.7 B8,0

6 110 2BO 4:J:J 665 BOO 1048 11120 1465 1645 117.0 89

1 52 121 235 330 410 583 675 815 882 112.7 508 50 1[3 .190 280 376 550 652. 805 804 1l0.8 46

6,6000 9 50 125 217 328 432 640 775 950 1090 113.3 112.7 53 4?2(30 blowsper layer) 10 51 120 203 302 400 614 762 976 1135 113,2 49.

11 50 100 195 300 395 588 755 810 895 112.0 4812 45 116 210 320 425 617 720 855 960 114.2 49

13 24 48 87 162 235 452 545 640 672 107,4 3914 35 61 72 210 300 455 573 660 713 108.7 40

3,300 15 21 51 131 208 302 465 550 630 665 109.3 108.4 42 39.0(15 blowsper layer) 16 20 58 125 218 300 445 570 720 825 lQ9.3 39

17 22 55 120 207 297 425 510 596 620 107,9 3818 20 52 105 185 255 400 490 570 622 107.8 36

From CBR-density plot (Fig.~.17A),CBR at 100 percent standard AASHO density is 79.5 percent,

t-w

• 0

(

.} .'\", .,

Table 0-2 OaR Test Result for Gas Burnt Picked Jhama Brick; Gradation X. 2

Compactiveeffort,Ib-ft/c ft

5pn.No.

~enetration load

0.02 0.04 0.06

in psi required for penetra"tionsin inches0.08 0.10 0.15 0.20 G.ao 0.40

LJrydensitylos/eft

Av g.drydensityIb sic ft

:....orrec-ted CUR

in ',70

,; '}g.cor.:JR'::"il

14,300(65 blowsper layer)

1

2

3

4

5

6

122118127108106126

285295

27420C24830G

512:167

50G474

403

cOS

548627610622637676

875

782t1ZC

878776

9CJ

1142 .111'1 1'115 1620 ll~.('

1051 1234 1367 1518 118.31150 1350 1671' 1910 12[.91128 1324 1500 1675 119.1lu70 1252 1415 1596 110.5119~ 133L 1475 16S~ 11~:.5

Ii'!.]

?L

949135

86, c

;::2.6

562 759 a78 972 112.3



7

B

9

1011

1213

1415161718

4845

5450

45

47181516171815

1071115

13313010510858

5654503850

20G1u7~~,

226,~-.J.!:J

18020212413C141

12482

125

296

300350

268267

307

208204223103150200

3844uJ

400371370

400303

2n7~,

300252240267

540620

SSG525650

446445

457402405450

700

BOG642

700762

550

526

565507

460557

86G 980IOU 1246

BiD 998824 90S

922 1031

690 785647 648

729 77 5

600 732

635 660720 825

112.41.:'3.

112. [

111.C;

113.21, 1 ~

•••••..L ••••••

11e. ~

11G.7

1nn' •L':;' • 4

lOb.7109.5

':'1 ~. c

110.1

464 ~~

i"

46513B

37

1..1

35

34

39

~~.3

From CDR-density plot (Fig.4.171l),CBR at 100 percent standard AA5HO density is 71.0 percent.

~

.,...'.... \ /.I- -,-. ,

r'~'__ r-.'

,,....f..>....

_ ..•.

"\.1-

Table C.,.3 CE,~ Test Result ~or Gas Burnt Picked Jhama Brick; Gradation X3

Compactive Span. Penetration load in psi reouired for oenetrations Dry A v g. Correc- Avg.effort, No. in inches density dry ted cor.Ib-ft,Lcft 0.02 0.011 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 Ibs/cft density C3R eRR

Ibs/cft in ~"~ . d1n ,~)

1 135 286 457 575 760 1035 1162 1375 1540 121.5 8414,300 2 101 247 470 600 770 1020 1140 1332 1772 120.1 84(65 blows 3 199 253 438 550 742 1033 1152 1315 1455 119.4 120.2 82 86per layer)

4 110 290 475 636 820 1055 1225 1380 1550 119.6 875 123 272 450 597 803 12023 1163 1370 1538 118.4 866 102 290 47c.. 650 842 1075 1170 1436 1639 122.6 90,~

7 45 140 187 300 403 605 710 865 980 113.3 50,6,600 Il 37 IG4 2Gl 296 350 532 655 800 920 112.0 44(30 blows

0 42 102 180 260 340 40 ~ 638 747 516 112. [) 112.1 42 46per layer) , / ~.10 47 126 183 300 405 570 674 90C 973 11C.8 4811 50 102 150 255 332 501 556 674 740 111.1 4112 46 121 252 310 430 600 684 853 994 113.5 51.

13 16 50 122 200 276 421 512 642 655 112.7 373,300 14 18 52 140 202 300 435 522 620 670 11.4 3d(15 blows 15 13 51 98 200 250 400 470 535 560 110. 5 lleJ.75 34 35per layer)

16 20 54 107 175 253 410 450 550 605 109 . 6 3417 18 52 108 155 238 350 421 517 562 109.4 3118 22 51 124 200 270 424 500 591 673 IHi.9 36

From CBR-Density plot (Fig.'l.IIlA),CBR at 100 percent standard AA5HO density is 77.5 percent.

iC ". .\~:~---:--\ •...) w

N

/.

'..,,' ,,-

Table C-4 CBR Test Result for Gas iJurnt Picked Jhal7laBrick; Gradation X4,

Compactive Spn. Penetration lo-i3d--'fn- psi requireCf for penetrations Dry Avg. Correc- Avg.effort. IYo. inches density dry ted CRR Cor.lb-ft/cft 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 lbs/cft density in % CBR

lbs/cft • -Il.n i~

1 142 325 509 735 940 1138 1295 1545 1730 121.7 1022 115 323 505 697 882 1165 1307 1600 1774 121.G 98

14,300 3 136 364 550 705 938 1242 1460 1665 1847 123.4 121.8 101 99.0(65 blowsper layer) 4 112 27 j 525 675. 868 1197 1350 1570 1754 121.7 97

5 U5 297 495 698 840 1158 1365 1593 .L806 120.8 966 118 320 504 700 902 1165 1375 1550 1695 121.8 1007 50 130 220 322 425 630 750 915 1025 115.0 53

6,600 8 48 lOB 196 305 403 596 732 853 902 114.1 49(30 b1010'S 9 45 125 237 330 426 634 750 915 1028 114. 2 114.0 52 52per layerj

10 50 108 218 320 4.10 590 786 960 1120 112.5 5211 51 136 210 373 435 622 755 925 1063 115.1 5412 50 125 262 323 410 598 728 870 928 113 •.0 50

13 16 65 150 240 332 500 580 650 695 111.9 46

3,300 14 15 54 132 231 320 487 602 695 730 111.5 45(15 blows 15 13 52 106 200 301 471 632 652 722 110.9 111.2 41 43.3per layer

16 17 65 117 222 307 475 605 760 925 109.7 43

17 13 66 160 200 310 500 605 800 850 112.4 44

18 23 67 114 240 300 475 573 675 680 110.8 41

From CDR-density plot (Fig.4.186),CBR at 100 percent standard AA5HO density is 87.0 percent.

~

~..,..,

.r.~ ',-

Table e.5 eRR Test Result for Gas Jurnt Picked Jhama Urick; - d ~' Xbra 8 ...1.0n 5.

Compactiv-e Spn. Pen~tration load in psi required for penetrations Dry Avg. Correc- Avg.effort, No. in inches density dry ted eBR cor.lb-ft,tcft O.OZ 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.15 o.ZO 0.30 0.40 lbs/cft density in % eSR

lbs/cft in %1 106 303 440 600 806 1060 1255 lJ24 1695 ' l' .:0 ' 86J.. .•...O. -' u

14, 300 2 98 268 453 628 -0 - 1065 1225 1495 1520 116. I j 87{-' J(65 blolvs 3 87 217 375 535 670 B76 990 111;;> 1205 116. B 117.75 73 79.0per layer)

4 72 215 4U6 520 ' 712 954 1040 1225 1400 117.0 795 75 210 355 51B 623 865 lOD3 1142 1250 116.3 706 110 ,255 410 603 712 965 1120 1355 1547 118.7S 79

7 47 100 175 204 355 517 600 760 875 113.76 426,600 8 48 a6 180 235 330 500 605 7=2 aoo 113.clc 41(30 blows 0 37 9B 1'53 236 31 J 483 570 668 725 113.J2 113.5 40 41.[;per layer;

10 "" 56 1'56 2:'10 31C 47G :laO illS a10 112.9:: 30J~

11 36 82 153 2 L; 5 32~ 99G 57- 685 750 113.::;L1 40,0

12 82 184 262 3S2 550 665 675 622 960 114.[:0 43

13 13 5G 112 170 252 426 520 623 744 112.0 363,300 14 15 50 125 196 270 400 SOD 560 605 112.9 36(15 blows 15 11 47 lCU 165 245 ""r 44Z 455 6UO 112.9'] .liZ.8 34 33.0per layer) ~~u

16 10 26, 87 152 220 325 347 387 400 112.35 301 7 10 42 92 173 185 335 425 535 565 :2.12.7 30~,18 45 97 145 2UO 27C 366 507 560 655 112.9 31

~

from CBR-Density plot (fig.4,~A), e8~ at 100 percent standard AASHO density

.~

is 65.0 percent.•...to>~

-~ ~

Table C-7 CBR Test Rasult for Crushed stone; Gradation Z.

Compactive Span P en-;-tiat-io n 10 a-d- in ----psir equ ir 8d for penetrations Dry Avg. [orrec- Avg~

effort, No. in inches density dry ted CBR Cor.Ib-ft/cft 0.02 G.04 0.06 u.olJ U.I0 0.15 0.20 o.llo 0.40 Ibs/cft density in % CBR

Ib sl cft . ,./1. n ;'J

1 1r-, c:: 4L.;2 SUO 802 lC:1S 1450 1647 1960 2lB 5 152.7 112Wo

14,300 2 1[17 ~~47 54 L aDS loue 1335 1563 IB28 211[: F, 1 .3 108(65 blows 3 135 35LJ 551 792 1C<:~0 1"" :::: 1506 1750 lY 36 IJ,B.O 149.9 114 110per layer) ...;..L ••.••

4 110 325 530 741 9 S5 1326 1'\00 lC12 1675 140.8 1045 105 347 600 725 997 1302 1418 1720 IB22 149.2 1[;76 103 345 513 798 1G5o IdOO 1550 1635 1906 149.9 115

~ 48 182 290 400 515 72C 825 1040 lId 5 145.0 61I

6,600 8 50 145 300 4C 5 54C 815 933 1135 1222 147.2 66(30 blows 9 45 • "0 24B 386 ~OC 6Q~ 3:2 93Q 982 145.5 145. 5 60 61. 6per layer) l.~~ ..,-/ ...J v .

lQ 72 155 32[; ,,26. 548 748 8::;7 1062 1190 145.6 62

II 46 126 224 402 486 704 81C 996 llOo 1d5.6 58.12 47 135 280 405 532 747 875 108Q 1212 la 5 .6 63

13 18 78 150 252 355 552 638 642 750 142.9 49

3,300 14 20 05 182 30D 4DC 620 750 955 1042 144.9 56(15 blows 15 15 B4 165 285 350 552 662 7Bo 845 143.8 143.8 50 52.8per layer)

16 d3 In~ 205 303 486 582 730 8lJ3 864 144.2 . 53WI

17 15 68 155 250 305 585 610 721 760 143.8 49

18 35 7d 196 306 420 648 758 BBo 976 142.5 5B

from CBR-density plot (fig. ~.."'A), C~R at 100 ~8rcent standard AA5Ho density is 94.0 percent.

l~. •••---.-

:~ w~. .0\

-- ~

..:'

Table C-8 CBR Test Result for Coal Burnt Picked Jhama Brick; Gradation Z.Compactive 5pn. Penetration load in psi required for penetrations Dry Avg. Correc- Avg.effort, No. in inches density dry ted CBR Cor ..Ib-ft/cft 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.l5 0.20 0.30 0.40 Ibs/cft density in % CaRIbs/cft in ~

1 103 252 458 560 7B7 1093 1230 1482 1652 119.6 B614,300 2 98 248 450 642 743 1078 1241 1390 1489 120.8 85(65 b

l10WS) 3 105 286 516 650 822 1155 1354 1691 1832 123.3 120.8 91 67.3

per ayer 4 97 21B 503 692 B43 1145 1272 1537 1700 121.4 915 98 270 419 655 BOO 1109 1268 1550 1746 119.5 906 121 240 410 600 772 1028 1176 136B 149B 120.7 B3

7 46 105 202 2B2 395 522 697 701 B50 112.9 466,600 8 47 96 205 300 401 401 550 730 825 915 112.7 48 4i.5(30 blows 9 48 121 173 348 451 652 778 978 1150 113.3 54per layer) 10 40 100 160 2J3 320 460 650 847 942 111.9 40

11 51 112 200 320 412 57B 746 696 998 11?8 5012 45 115 184 295 378 526 690 800 871 112.6 47

13 15 47 150 194 262 423 538 624 670 110.9 373,300 14 17 58 119 175 250 415 468 568 588 111.0 34(15 blOWS) 15 14 46 91 161 225 370 470 547 620 107.3 108.9 32 33.6per layer .16 15 49 90 177 227 364 957 550 653 107.9 31

17 20 64 128 200 275 425 533 648 730 10B.9 3718 15 48 96 173 226 350 426 557 648 107.2 31

From CSR-density plot (Fig.4.~~, CSR at 100 percent standard AA5HO density is 74.0 percent.

(, - ~'. w ~~.~~-- ---

Table C-9 CBR Test Ilesult for First Clas"s Brick, Gradation Z.

Compactive Span Penetra~ion load in psi required for penetra'tions Dry Avg. Correc- Avg.effort, No. in inches "----- densi':y dry ted cor.Ib-ft/cft 0.02 0.04 J.OS 0.G8 0.10 0.15 o . 20 0.30 o 40 Ib sl c ft den si ty CBR CaR

. Ib sl c ft i n ~~ in %1 lul 250 405 546 703 935 1102 1270 1365 119,1 78

14,300 2 102 235 462 59G 747 11UO 121U 1500 1692 116.3 81(65 blowsper layer) 3 98 241 410 550 712 HilS 1098 1370 1565 116. G 117.0 80 79.0

4 100 253 419 562 722 995 1230 1480 1675 116,1 Bl5 99 248 390 550 64B 950 1125 1315 16U8 115.6 756 102 250 414 555 706 102il 1126 1407 1622 llB.7 79

1 42 77 180 2[,0 266 455 545 672 765 112,6 366,600 2 49 98 162 22B 310 4BO 650 B15 96B 111.B 3B(30 blows 3 29 70 151 240 316 500 624 B20 945 109,9 110. B 49 37.5per layer) .

4 22 76 153 247 312 4<;;5 572 77B B46 109.u 395 2B 7B 155 210 33B 450 562 673 7Bo 110.1 366 30 75 147 212 313 407 56B 710 765 111.2 35

1 25 47 7B 147 200 326 415 500 602 111.2 2B3,300 2 22 51 100 132 225 327 430 505 595 109.4 29(15 blows 3 13 28 62 152 200 350 442 545 556 lLlB.2 10B.9 30 29.0per layer)

4 12 47 100 150 222 367 472 550 650 107.9 325 10 42 75 140 IBO 300 405 495 510 lu 7. B 276 11 43 73 145 19B 315 400 514 647 luB,9 2B

From CBR-Density plot (Fig. 4"~8A), CaR at 100 percent stand ard AASHO density is 62.5 percent.,l( , •••

W5/_ ex> .~

~.

Table C-I0 CBR Test Result for Third Cless Brick; Gradation Z.

Compactive Span, Pene~ration load in psi required for penetrations Dry Avg, Correc- Av g,effort, No. in inches density dry ted CaR ClDr.Ib - ft/ cft 0,02 D,04 0.06 0,08 0,10 0,15 U,20 0,30 0,40 Ibs/cft density in % CBR

Ibs/cft . ~~n 1'"J

1 lU5 210 315 ,110 540 755 9l~0 1165. 1370 118.0 5814,300 2 85 120 295 402 515 7U2 oC 3 S 950 llJ45 117.1 57(65 blows 3 70 145 320 390 483 723 897 1COO 1113 116.) 116,0 55 56. ~per layer)

4 68 15U 312 385 452 62lJ 84U 985 1145 114.[; 545 82 120 268 375 501 71L; 605 1007 1100 115,1 536 74 157 302 455 557 728 045 922 1040 115.6 62

7 25 75 130 205 270 445 525 705 805 112.8 346,600 8 ,~ 63 135 183 245 370 5eO 635 720 111.5 304/

(30 blows 9 33 75 15u 247 279 476 57C 710 796 11C.9 11U,75 37 33.4per layer)10 37 76 148 208 282 4117 %5 647 75[; llC.5 34.

62211 38 72 142 200 27U 3q~ 515 572 1[9.5 33- I

12 36 76 150 200 265 400 520 600 670 }O9.3 32

13 15 45 75 120 180 300 375 520 580 109.9 253,300 14 10 32 77 lOS 180 262 362 472 557 108,8 24(blows 15 18 42 72 128 152 298 351 485 505 108,1 108,2 23 23,5per layer)

16 16 28 74 120 138 255 312 375 403 107,7 2117 26 45 97 148 198 305 382 477 548 109,S 2618 10 28 65 112 163 250 335 417 465 106,9 22

From CBR-density plot (Fig,4.;<aa),CRR at 100 percent stand ard AA5HO density is 42,0 percent,

l-e..>

'"

~;

~,

..,,

Table [-12 Liquid Limit Test Result

140

No. 0 l'observation

No. of blows

\Jater -content

1

9

28,5

2

12

26,5

3

18

23.5

4

30

20.5

5

41

19.5

The soil is non plastic

Table 0-11 Hydrometer Analysis

141

Soil Sample: Materials passing No. 4U sieve from soil-aggregate

mixture in gradation L.

"t. of dry soil: 50 gms. Specific gravity of soil: 2.67

N': % finer : 6U~ : 0.60oTemp. : 32 Hyd. No, 002966.

ElapsedDate Time R: R : R-R Z in D in N in N' in

in w w r %cm %minutes m.m

21.12,81 1/4 1023 -D.5 23,5 11,36 0.D926 75.33 45.19

1/2 ID17 " 17.5 12.945 0.0699 56.10 33,66

1 1012 " 12,5 14.215 O,U52 40,0 24,0

2 1009 " 9 •5 15.025 0,037 30,45 18.27

4 1005,5 " 6.0 14,83 0,0264 19,20 11,52

8 ],003 " 3,5 15.505 0,019 11,20 6,72

15 1002.5 " 3.0 15,74 0.014 9.60 5,76

30 1002 " 2.5 15,875 0.01 8.0 4,8

60 1001.2 " 1.7 16.1 0.00712 5.4 3,24

120 1000,8 " 1.3 16,28 0.005 4.16 2.496

240 IDOO,2 " 0.7 16,60 0.0036 2,24 1,34

..-~"~

I

F' C, Equipment and materiels for the'9. - compaction of ellR molds.

- .••

,,~

J'.

, '..;I J

.., .•.. •..L.' <:Q..••••

,.•..

"."

f :~~'.I .1 'IjQ.~ . '.' ~~~ ~~

,f '<C:l'!." .e.~

,/

~,. /

f ...•

F,'9,C-2 The mixture is ready for compaction

5 '"0

~

eo.

'-- :>,, ...,

fir']"C

':-, IIIIII

'"OJ.,. •'"'tI III

IJ' rol •••~! Q III

V' Ie :J

,> 'tI c:

\ I ,I) ..-l•••, u c:

/ "

l!l Q

./ c. .,.-.t ~--~~- e lJl

~,'" / 0 '"er~- u I)

~'i!I ,- ..;~ eI) Cl.os:. ~•...

,

•

•III!:I'mc: III.,. kIII 0-.0

a>lJl c:.,. .,.

1;1c: I)Ql Qerol.,.UrolIII IIIo.uIll.,.

c:0:: III:=s:.u U

IIIQl es:.

•••• CD

BEHAVIOUR OF BRICK AGGREGATES IN

Documents

Transcript of BEHAVIOUR OF BRICK AGGREGATES IN